Appendix 1: Cultural and Historic Resources

APPENDIX 1: CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES

1-A: Correspondence with NJHPO

1 – Section 106 Consulting Parties Initiation Letters

2 – NJHPO Concurrence of Adverse Effects Letter: April 3, 2017

3 – Draft Programmatic Agreement Transmittal Letter to NJHPO: April 5, 2019

1-B: Programmatic Agreement

1-C: Cultural and Historic Resources

1-D: Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project 

Appendix 1 – A 

CORRESPONDENCE WITH NJHPO
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project 

Appendix 1 – A – 1 

SECTION 106 CONSULTING PARTIES INITIATION LETTERS


Attachment A 

Figures 
§ ̈¦280

§ ̈¦95

Kearny

Harrison

Newark

Newark Tpke

Newark Tpke

Lockwood St

Albert Ave

Blanchard St

Sanford Ave

3Rd St

Lister Ave

Pennsylvania Ave

Harrison Ave

Bergen Ave

Boylan Ave

Catherine St

Cornelia St

Joseph St

Esther St

Chapel St

Jacobus Ave

Passaic

River

7/31/2015

0 1,000 FEET

Figure 1

Project Site

Study Area

Municipal Boundary

Project Site

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT
280

95

Newark Tpke

Newark Tpke

Lockwood St

Albert Ave

Blanchard St

Sanford Ave

3Rd St

Lister Ave

Pennsylvania Ave

Harrison Ave

Bergen Ave

Boylan Ave

Catherine St

Cornelia St

Joseph St

Esther St

Chapel St

Jacobus Ave

Passaic River

8/20/2015

0 1,000 FEET

Figure 2

Project Site/Archaeological APE

Study Area

Historic Properties

Historic Districts

Source: NJDEP, Historic Preservation Office.

Architectural APE and

Known Architectural Resources

Amtrak Substation 4

Hudson Tower

Old Main Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Historic District

Pennsylvania Railroad New York to Philadelphia Historic District

Pennsylvania Railroad New York Bay Branch Historic District

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT
DRAFT 1 September XX, 2015 

Attachment B: Cultural Resources Methodology

A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 

The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is proposing the replacement of Amtrak 

Bridge No. 7.80 and Amtrak Bridge No. 7.96. These bridges, collectively known as the 

"Sawtooth Bridges," are located in the Town of Kearny, Hudson County, New Jersey along a 

critical segment of the Northeast Corridor (NEC) between Newark, New Jersey and New York, 

New York (see Attachment A, Figure 1). The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is serving 

as the lead federal agency for this environmental review, being conducted in accordance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended. The Sawtooth Bridges are located along the 

New Jersey and National Register (S/NR)-eligible Pennsylvania Railroad New York to 

Philadelphia Historic District (NEC, Pennsylvania to New York). 

The Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project (the “Proposed Project”) will include construction of 

new bridges along the NEC, decommissioning and removal of the existing Sawtooth Bridges, 

necessary modifications to adjacent interlockings and crossovers, and other related 

improvements. The Proposed Project will be constructed within existing rail right-of-way. 

Property acquisition from Conrail will be required, along with a number of utility and other 

easements.

B. PROPOSED ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL 

RESOURCES ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES 

PROPOSED AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT (APE) 

A required step in the Section 106 process is determining the Area of Potential Effect (APE), 

which is defined as "the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or 

indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if such properties exist" 

(36 CFR § 800.16[d]). The APE is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking. The 

project will have one APE. However, to facilitate the analysis of effects, the APE will be 

subdivided to indicate the area in which the Proposed Project could cause potential direct effects 

and the area in which the Proposed Project could cause indirect effects. The area in which 

potential direct effects could occur may also be known as the “project site” or the archaeological 

resources APE. The area in which potential indirect effects could occur may also be known as 

the architectural resources APE. The proposed APE is described below. As engineering for the 

Proposed Project progresses, if changes to the APE boundaries are required, the proposed 

changes will be submitted to NJHPO for review and concurrence. 

APE FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

The area of potential effect for archaeological resources includes all areas that could experience 

ground disturbance under the Proposed Project. The archaeological APE is shown in Attachment 

A, Figure 2. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project 

September XX, 2015 2 DRAFT

Potential in-ground disturbances may result from the construction of a new bridge. 

Modifications and/or additions to existing railroad tracks, embankments, and other railroad 

infrastructure could occur throughout the archaeological APE. Staging areas or temporary access 

roads could also be required during the construction phase. 

APE FOR ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES 

In general, potential effects to architectural resources can include both direct physical effects 

(e.g., demolition, alteration, or damage from construction on nearby sites) and indirect 

contextual effects, such as the isolation of a property from its surrounding environment, or the 

introduction of visual, audible, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with a property 

or that alter its setting. The APE for architectural resources (shown in Attachment A, Figure 2) 

is, therefore, larger to account for any potential impacts that may occur where proposed 

construction activities could physically alter architectural resources or be close enough to them 

to potentially cause physical damage or visual or contextual impacts. 

The APE for architectural resources for this project is defined as the area surrounding the project 

site within visual range of the project site. It also accounts for potential construction-related 

impacts. The APE for architectural resources extends 750 feet from the project site. These 

boundaries have been delineated to account for potential visual impacts of proposed construction 

activity along the Northeast Corridor. 

Architectural resources may be impacted by elements of the Proposed Project alternatives 

including, removal of the existing Sawtooth Bridges; and modifications and/or additions to 

existing railroad tracks, embankments, and other railroad infrastructure throughout the project 

site. 

IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

Archaeological studies will be undertaken to determine whether significant (S/NR-eligible) 

archaeological resources are present within the archaeological APE. First, the archaeological 

APE will be assessed for areas that may be sensitive for archaeological resources through the 

preparation of a Phase I Archaeological Documentary Study (“Phase I”). The Phase I will be 

prepared in accordance with New Jersey Historic Preservation Office Guidelines for Phase I 

Archaeological Investigations. It will involve a combination of comprehensive documentary 

research and field investigation of the project corridor. Background research efforts will include 

the development of a prehistoric and historic context, a discussion of the evolution of land use 

patterns based on historic cartographic sources and soil surveys, and an inventory of all 

previously recorded archaeological sites within the vicinity of the APE such as archaeological 

sites on file at the NJSM. Documentary research will be conducted to identify areas where 

prehistoric or historic-period activities may have occurred and resulted in archaeological 

resources. For each area where prehistoric or historic-period activities may have left 

archaeological remains, construction activities and other ground disturbances that occurred later 

on the site will be evaluated in order to identify locations where any archaeological resources, if 

originally present, may have survived. If background research identified areas of potential 

archaeological sensitivity, archaeologists will conduct field investigations (such as the 

excavation of shovel test pits and/or test units) to determine the presence or absence of 

potentially significant archaeological resources in the APE. If it is determined that additional 

survey is needed, the project team will coordinate with the NJHPO to determine the appropriate 

next steps in order to comply with Section 106. If warranted, a Phase II survey may be 
Attachment B: Cultural Resources Methodology 

DRAFT 3 September XX, 2015

undertaken to determine the boundaries and evaluate the significance of any archaeological 

deposits identified. 

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES 

Once the APE is determined, an inventory of officially recognized architectural resources within 

the APEs will be compiled based on the files of the NJHPO and the New Jersey State Museum 

(NJSM). This inventory will include properties or districts listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places (NR) and/or the New Jersey State Register (SR), or determined eligible for such 

listing; and National Historic Landmarks (NHLs). 

Any potential architectural resources (i.e., properties that may be eligible for listing on the 

S/NR) within the architectural APE will also be identified based on field surveys by an 

architectural historian conducted in accordance with 36 CFR § 800.4 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended). Research will be conducted on any potential 

architectural resources to identify pertinent historical information, such as date of construction 

and alterations, builder, architect, and relevant historic context(s). If appropriate, an architectural 

historian will prepare and submit a Historic Resources Inventory Form documenting any 

potential resources and submit such forms to NJHPO for review. 

PROPOSED IMPACTS ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 

Once the archaeological and architectural resources in the APEs are confirmed, the effects of the 

project on those resources will be assessed through application of the criteria of adverse effect as 

set forth in 36 CFR 800.5. The effects analysis will be based on the proposed construction and 

the anticipated effects it may have on archaeological and architectural resources. In order to 

assess the potential effects of project construction on archaeological resources, areas of 

archaeological sensitivity will be compared to the vertical and horizontal extent of the proposed 

disturbance to determine the potential for impacts. The assessment of the potential effects of 

project construction on architectural resources will include direct effects (such as constructionperiod activities that could physically alter or damage architectural resources) and indirect 

effects (such as visual or contextual changes that would diminish the historic integrity of 

architectural resources). A determination of adverse effect would be made if the analysis 

concludes that the Proposed Project would alter the characteristics of cultural resources that 

qualify them for inclusion in the NR. 

C. SECTION 106 CONSULTING PARTIES 

In accordance with 36 CFR 800.2, the lead federal agency, the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation (ACHP), other consulting parties, and the public are identified as participants in the 

Section 106 process. Consulting parties may include: the project sponsor, the New Jersey State 

Historic Preservation Officer (NJHPO); the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO); 

federally recognized Indian tribes that attach religious and cultural significance to historic 

properties that may be affected by an undertaking; and representatives of local governments. 

Consulting parties may also include other individuals and organizations with a demonstrated 

interest in the proposed federal undertaking. 

As a part of the Section 106 consultation requirements for the Sawtooth Bridges Replacement 

Project, FRA will invite the ACHP to participate in the Section 106 consultation. The ACHP 

may elect not to participate and instead rely on the NJHPO to provide comments and 

concurrence. Other potential consulting parties that will be invited to participate in this project 

include: 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project 

September XX, 2015 4 DRAFT

 Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma 

 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

 Anthracite Railroads Historical Society, Inc. 

 Cherokee Nation of New Jersey 

 Consolidated Rail Corporation 

 The Delaware Nation 

 Delaware Tribe Historic Preservation Office 

 Eastern Delaware Nation 

 Eastern Lenape Nation of Pennsylvania Office and Cultural Center 

 Hudson County 

 Hudson County Division of Cultural Affairs & Tourism 

 Hudson County Division of Planning 

 Meadowlands Museum 

 Nanticoke Association 

 Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape Indians of New Jersey 

 New Jersey Meadowlands Commission/MRC 

 New Jersey Turnpike Authority 

 New York Chapter, Railway and Locomotive Historical Society 

 New Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection: Historic Preservation 

 North Jersey Chapter, National Railway Historical Society, Inc. 

 The Oneida Indian Nation 

 Passaic River Coalition 

 Pennsylvania Railroad Technical and Historical Society 

 Powhatan Renape Nation Rankokus Indian Reservation 

 Rail-Marine Information Group 

 Ramapough Lunaape Community Center 

 Roebling Chapter - Society for Industrial Archeology 

 Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma 

 Society of Industrial Archaeology 

 Stockbridge-Munsee Band of Mohican Indians 

 Thomas Flagg 

 Town of Harrison Mayor's Office 

 Town of Kearny Mayor's Office 

 Tri-State Chapter, National Railway Historical Society 

 United Railroad Historical Society of New Jersey 

Periodically throughout the Section 106 process, FRA and Amtrak will provide the public with 

information about the undertaking and its effects on historic properties. The public will be given 
Attachment B: Cultural Resources Methodology 

DRAFT 5 September XX, 2015

opportunities to provide input on the potential effects of the project, as well as any resolution of 

adverse effects on historic resources that may result from the project. It is assumed that, in 

accordance with 36 CFR § 800.2(d)(3), the procedures utilized for public involvement under 

NEPA will also satisfy the requirements of the Section 106 process. 
SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT 

POTENTIAL CONSULTING PARTIES AND INDIAN TRIBES 

Proposed Consulting and Interested Parties 

Reid Nelson Director of Federal Agency Programs

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

401 F Street NW, Suite 308 

Washington, DC 20001 -2637 

John K. Enright 

Consolidated Rail Corporation 

1717 Arch Street, Suite 1310 

Philadelphia, PA 19103 

Thomas A. DeGise 

Hudson County Executive 

Justice Brennan Court House 

583 Newark Ave. 

Jersey City, NJ 07306 

Jamie Fox, Chairman 

New Jersey Turnpike Authority 

P.O. Box 5042 

Woodbridge, NJ 07095 

William (Bill) LaRosa, Director of Cultural Affairs & Tourism 

Hudson County Division of Cultural Affairs & Tourism, Brennan Courthouse 

583 Newark Avenue 

Newark, NJ 07306 

Massiel M. Ferrara, PP, AICP, Division Chief

Hudson County Division of Planning 

Meadowview Complex, Bldg. 1, Floor 2 

595 County Avenue 

Secaucus, NJ 07094 

 

Michael Ferguson , Chairman

New Jersey Meadowlands Commission 

1 Dekorte Park Plaza 

P.O. Box 640 

Lyndhurst, NJ 07071 

James A. Fife, Mayor 

Town of Harrison Mayor's Office 

318 Harrison Avenue 

Harrison, NJ 07029 
Alberto G. Santos, Mayor 

Town of Kearny Mayor's Office 

402 Kearny Avenue 

Kearny, NJ 07032 

Daniel Saunders, Deputy SHPO 

Mail Code 501-04B 

NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection 

Historic Preservation 

PO Box 420 

501 East State Street

4th Floor

Trenton, NJ 08625-0420 

Anthracite Railroads Historical Society, Inc. 

P.O. Box 519 

Lansdale, PA 19446 

John E. Barth, President 

North Jersey Chapter, National Railway Historical Society, Inc. 

54 Poplar St

Closter, NJ 07624-1036

John Teichmoeller, Coordinator 

Rail-Marine Information Group 

12107 Mt. Albert Rd 

Ellicott City, MD 21042 

Michael Del Vecchio, President 

Tri-State Chapter, National Railway Historical Society 

P.O. Box 1217 

Morristown, NJ 07962-1217 

Kate Kelleher, Administrative Assistant 

Passaic River Coalition 

330 Speedwell Avenue 

Morristown, NJ 07960 

Gilda Healy, Interim Director 

Meadowlands Museum 

91 Crane Avenue, 

Rutherford, NJ 07070 

Ed Swain, Public Relations Manager 

Pennsylvania Railroad Technical and Historical Society 

6469 Winter Hazel Drive 

Middletown, OH 45044-8351 
Joe Macasek, President 

Roebling Chapter 

Society for Industrial Archeology 

19 Budd Street 

Morristown, NJ 07960 

Larry Gross, President 

United Railroad Historical Society of New Jersey 

PO Box 711 

Clark, NJ 07066 

Society of Industrial Archaeology 

National Headquarters 

c/o Department of Social Sciences 

Michigan Tech 

1400 Townsend Dr 

Houghton, MI 49931-1295 

Thomas Flagg 

SUNY College of Optometry 

33 West 42nd St 

New York, NY 10036 

Tommy Meehan, Membership/Chapter Chairman 

New York Chapter, Railway and Locomotive Historical Society 

42 Portland Pl FL 2, Yonkers NY 10703-2206
Non-Federally Recognized Tribe List 

Tony Powell 

Ramapough Mountain Indians 

Ramapough Lunaape Community Center 

189 Stag Hill Road 

Mahwah, NJ 07430 

C.W. Longbow, Principal Chief 

Cherokee Nation of New Jersey 

182 Ellery Ave. 

Newark NJ, 07106 

Corrine Remington, Secretary 

Eastern Delaware Nation 

Boro Line Road 

Dushore, Pa 18614 

Eastern Lenape Nation of Pennsylvania Office and Cultural Center 

P.O. Box 43 

Saylorsburg, PA 18353 

William H. Daisey, Chief 

Nanticoke Association 

27073 John J. Williams Highway 

Millsboro, DE 19966 

Mark Gould, Tribal Chairperson 

Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape Indians of New Jersey 

18 East Commerce Street 

Bridgeton, NJ 08302 

Powhatan Renape Nation Rankokus Indian Reservation 

P.O. Box 2353 

Riverton NJ 08077 
Federally Recognized Tribe List 

Nekole Alligood Cultural Preservation Director 

The Delaware Nation 

Cultural Preservation Office 

PO Box 825 

31064 State Highway 281 

Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005 

Jodi Hayes, Tribal Administrator 

Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma 

P.O. Box 189 

29 S Hwy 69A 

Miami, Oklahoma, 74354 

shawneetribe@shawnee-tribe.com 918.542.2441 

Joseph Blanchard, THPO 

Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma 

2025 South Gordon Cooper Drive 

Shawnee, Oklahoma 74801 

Phone: 405-275-4030 ext. 303 

Joseph.blanchard@astribe.com 

Sherry White 

Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 

Stockbridge-Munsee Community Band of Mohican Indians 

N8476 Moh He Con Nuck Road 

Bowler, Wisconsin 54416 

Phone: 715-793-3970 | Fax: 715-793-4836 

Email: sherry.white@mohican-nsn-gov 

Mr. Jesse Bergevin 

Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 

The Oneida Indian Nation 

1256 Union Street 

P.O.Box 662 

Oneida, New York 13421-0662 

Phone: (315) 829-8463 

Fax: (315 829-8473 

jbergevin@oneida-nation.org 

Dr. Brice Obermeyer 

Delaware Tribe Historic Preservation Office 

Roosevelt Hall, Rm 212 

1200 Commercial St. 

Emporia, Kansas 66801 

Telephone 918-335-7026 

bobermey@emporia.edu




AMTRAK BRIDGE

7.96 (OVER PATH AND CONRAIL)

AMTRAK BRIDGE

7.80 (OVER NJT)

2

6,7,8

95

5

3,4

1

280

280

280

Lister Ave

Jacobus Ave

Interstate 280

Bergen Ave

Blanchard St

New Jersey Tpke

Pennsylvania Ave

Harrison Ave

1/11/2016

0 1,000 FEET

Figure 1

Project Site

Photograph View Direction and Reference Number

Project Site

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

1

Amtrak Bridge 7.96

Amtrak Bridge 7.80

AREA OF DETAIL
Figure 2

Site Photographs

1.12.16

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

View of one of the Sawtooth Bridges (Amtrak Bridge No. 7.80) facing east 1 

View of one of the Sawtooth Bridges (Amtrak Bridge No. 7.80) facing west 2
Figure 3

1.12.16

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

View of one of the Sawtooth Bridges (Amtrak Bridge No. 7.96) facing southwest 3

View of one of the Sawtooth Bridges (Amtrak Bridge No. 7.96) facing south 4

Site Photographs
Figure 4

Site Photographs

1.12.16

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

View of one of the Sawtooth Bridges (Amtrak Bridge No. 7.96) to the left and the 

NJ Transit Br. 0.35 Harrison Connection to the right, facing northeast

5
Figure 5

Site Photographs

1.12.16

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

View of one of the Sawtooth Bridges 

(Amtrak Bridge No. 7.80) facing southwest 

View from underneath one of the Sawtooth Bridges 

(Amtrak Bridge No. 7.80) facing west

View of one of the Sawtooth Bridges 

(Amtrak Bridge No. 7.80) facing west 

6 7

8


Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project 

Appendix 1 – A – 2 

NJHPO CONCURRENCE OF ADVERSE EFFECTS LETTER: APRIL 3, 2017




Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project

Appendix 1 – A – 3

DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO 

NJHPO: APRIL 5, 2019
U.S. Department 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

of Transportation Washington, DC 20590

Federal Railroad 

Administration

April 5, 2019

Ms. Katherine J. Marcopul

Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer

Mail Code 501-04B

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

Historic Preservation Office, PO Box 420

501 East State Street, 4th Floor

Trenton, NJ 08625-0420

Re: Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project, Hudson County, NJ

HPO Project No. 16-0476

 Programmatic Agreement

Dear Ms. Marcopul:

As you know, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is proposing to replace Amtrak 

Bridges No. 7.80 and No. 7.96, collectively referred to as the “Sawtooth Bridges”, which are critical links 

and existing bottlenecks on Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor (NEC). The Federal Railroad Administration 

(FRA) is serving as the lead federal agency for the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) 

pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (Section 106), and other legislation for the 

proposed Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project (Proposed Project). The purpose of this letter is to 

continue consultation under Section 106.

Under the implementing regulations for Section 106 (36 CFR 800), FRA has determined that a 

Programmatic Agreement (PA), rather than a Memorandum of Agreement, is the most appropriate 

method to document procedures to continue the identification and evaluation of archaeological resources 

as well as to resolve the known adverse effects of the Proposed Project. Therefore, pursuant to 36 CFR 

800.14(b), this letter transmits the enclosed draft PA for your review and comment. The PA reflects 

mitigation stipulations proposed by FRA and your office from prior correspondence. 

Concurrent with your office’s review, by copying them on this letter, FRA also invites the Section 106 

consulting parties to review and comment on the draft PA. Please note that the public will also have an 

opportunity to review and comment on the Programmatic Agreement after SHPO and consulting party 

review when the Environmental Assessment is released for public review and comment.
Ms. Katherine J. Marcopul 2 April 5, 2019

FRA requests that your office provide comments on the draft PA within 30 days of receipt of this letter. 

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Brandon Bratcher, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, at (202) 493-0844 or brandon.bratcher@dot.gov or Johnette Davies, Amtrak’s Lead 

Historic Preservation Specialist, at 215-349-1354 or Johnette.davies@amtrak.com. Please copy Ms. 

Davies on your response.

Sincerely,

Katherine Zeringue

Federal Preservation Officer

Environmental & Corridor Planning Division 

Office of Railroad Policy and Development

Enc: Draft Programmatic Agreement

cc: Johnette Davies, Amtrak Lead Historic Preservation Specialist

John Brun, Amtrak Project Manager

Molly McDonald, AKRF

Leslie Mesnick, Calladium Group

James Bruno, Esq., Town of Kearny

Chester Brooks, Chief, Delaware Tribe

Kim Penrod, Delaware Nation

Tonya Tipton, Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project

Appendix 1 – B

PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT
PA-1

PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT

AMONG 

THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, 

THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION,

AND

THE NEW JERSEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER 

REGARDING THE 

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

TOWN OF KEARNY, HUDSON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

WHEREAS, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) is proposing the replacement of 

Amtrak Bridge No. 7.80 and Amtrak Bridge No. 7.96 (collectively known as the "Sawtooth Bridges"), 

located in the Town of Kearny, Hudson County, New Jersey (the “Project”); and

WHEREAS, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has provided financial assistance to Amtrak for 

design and environmental analyses for the Project in compliance with the National Environmental Policy 

Act (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.) (NEPA), and may provide future financial assistance to Amtrak for 

implementation of the Project; and

WHEREAS, FRA has determined that, should FRA provide financial assistance for implementation of 

the Project, it would become an “Undertaking” pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966 (54 U.S.C.§ 306108) (NHPA), as amended, and its implementing regulations at 

36 CFR § 800 (hereinafter collectively referred to as Section 106), and FRA would be responsible for 

compliance with Section 106; and

WHEREAS, should FRA provide financial assistance for implementation of the Project, FRA intends to 

use this Programmatic Agreement (PA) to satisfy its Section 106 responsibilities; and

WHEREAS, FRA is the lead Federal agency for the Project under NEPA and is preparing an 

Environmental Assessment pursuant to NEPA and FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental 

Impacts (64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999) and has coordinated Section 106 compliance with the NEPA 

process; and 

WHEREAS, Amtrak, owner and operator of the Northeast Corridor (NEC) and the existing Sawtooth 

Bridges, has acted as the Project designer responsible for carrying out the design in support of the NEPA 

process; and

WHEREAS, FRA, and Amtrak on behalf of FRA, have consulted with the New Jersey Historic 

Preservation Office (NJHPO) and defined the Project’s area of potential effects (“APEs”) (Attachment 

1), and NJHPO concurred with the APEs in a letter dated April 11, 2016; and 

WHEREAS, in a letter dated September 23, 2016, Amtrak, on behalf of FRA, invited potentially 

interested Federally-recognized Indian Tribes (Tribes) to participate in consultation for the purposes of 

Section 106, and FRA followed up with a letter dated March 1, 2017 to these same Tribes, attaching the 

APE, identification of historic properties in the APE – including the Phase 1A archaeology report, and 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-2

the determination of adverse effect, to the following invited Federally-recognized Indian Tribes: the 

Delaware Nation, the Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, the Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, the 

Stockbridge-Munsee Community, the Oneida Indian Nation, and the Delaware Tribe; and the Delaware 

Tribe, the Delaware Nation, and the Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma responded that no known cultural 

resources would be affected by the Project but asked to remain apprised of the Project as it moves 

forward; the Stockbridge-Munsee Community declined to participate; and the other Tribes did not 

respond; and

WHEREAS, in a letter dated September 23, 2016, Amtrak, on behalf of FRA, invited 26 organizations, 

institutions, governmental agencies, elected officials, other Indian Tribes, and individuals to participate

as Consulting Parties for the purposes of Section 106 (see Attachment 2), and Amtrak followed up with a 

letter to the same parties dated March 1, 2017 attaching the APE, identification of historic properties in 

the APE, and the determination of adverse effect, and the Town of Kearny accepted the invitation;

Thomas Flagg, a known industrial archaeologist, declined to participate; Conrail did not formally accept 

the invitation, but requested ongoing consultation with respect to engineering design; and the remaining 

entities did not respond; and

WHEREAS, FRA and Amtrak consulted with the parties that accepted the invitation to consult (the 

Consulting Parties); and 

WHEREAS, the Sawtooth Bridges are contributing elements within the Pennsylvania Railroad New 

York to Philadelphia Historic District (Northeast Corridor), which was determined eligible for the 

National Register of Historic Places (NR) by the Federal Highway Administration in consultation with

NJHPO on March 3, 2003; and

WHEREAS, FRA and Amtrak, in consultation with NJHPO, identified five (5) additional NR-listed or 

eligible historic properties in the Project’s APE, and NJHPO concurred with this identification on April 

3, 2017; and

WHEREAS, through consultation, FRA determined that the Project, if constructed, will have an adverse 

effect on one historic property, the Pennsylvania Railroad New York to Philadelphia Historic District and 

that no other historic properties would be adversely affected, and NJHPO concurred with this finding on 

April 3, 2017; and

WHEREAS, NJHPO requested that the reevaluation of the period of significance of the Pennsylvania 

Railroad New York to Philadelphia Historic District be included as a mitigation measure in this PA; 

however, the reevaluation of the period of significance of the Pennsylvania Railroad New York to 

Philadelphia Historic District was subsequently undertaken by NJ Transit and NJHPO concurred with the 

reevaluation on June 4, 2019; and 

WHEREAS, a Phase IA Documentary Study: Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project (AKRF: August 

2016) prepared for the Project and submitted to NJHPO and Federally-recognized Indian Tribes on 

March 1, 2017, identified areas of potential archaeological sensitivity at depths between 10 and 30 feet 

below the ground surface in areas that have not previously been disturbed as a result of the installation of 

utilities, the construction of the existing bridges, or other development (“archaeologically sensitive area”)

and NJHPO concurred with this characterization in a letter dated April 3, 2017; and

WHEREAS, through the consultation referenced above, FRA has concluded that the Project is located in 

an area with low potential for pre-contact archeological resources from 0- to 10-feet below ground 

surface and no potential for post-contact archeological resources but that Project designs cannot be 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-3

sufficiently advanced at this time, and the identification and effects on potential deeply buried precontact archeological resources cannot be fully determined at this very early stage of Project planning 

and design and prior completion of FRA’s NEPA process; and

WHEREAS, if the Project advances to final design and construction with financial assistance from FRA, 

FRA has elected to complete, in consultation with NJHPO, the final identification, evaluation, and 

effects assessment on archeological resources in phases, pursuant to 36 CFR § 800.4(b)(2) and 

800.5(a)(3), and in accordance with the ongoing consultation process specified in this PA pursuant to 36 

CFR § 800.14(b); and

WHEREAS, FRA has invited Amtrak, as the owner and operator of the NEC and the entity that would 

design and construct the Project, to participate in this PA as an invited Signatory with responsibilities 

under this PA, and Amtrak has accepted; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with 36 C.F.R. § 800.6(a)(1), on June 8, 2017 Amtrak on behalf of FRA,

notified the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) of FRA’s adverse effect determination

with specified documentation via the ACHP’s e106 system, and the ACHP responded to FRA in a letter 

dated June 21, 2017 that it has chosen not to participate in the consultation pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 

800.6(a)(1)(iii); and

NOW, THEREFORE, FRA, Amtrak, and NJHPO (each a Signatory and together the Signatories) agree 

that the Project, if it becomes an Undertaking, will be implemented in accordance with the following 

stipulations in order to avoid, minimize and mitigate adverse effects on historic properties, and that these 

stipulations will govern the Undertaking and all of its parts until this PA expires or is terminated.

STIPULATIONS

I. APPLICABILITY

This PA would apply to FRA’s Undertaking and would only bind FRA and Amtrak if FRA 

provides financial assistance for the construction of the Project.

II. PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATION STANDARDS

A. Amtrak will ensure that all historic preservation and documentation work regarding 

architectural properties carried out pursuant to this PA will be done by, or under the direct 

supervision of, a qualified professional(s) in the disciplines of architectural history who 

meet[s] the relevant standards outlined in the Secretary of the Interior's Professional 

Qualifications Standards for Architectural Historians (48 FR 44738-9).

B. Amtrak will ensure that all archaeological work carried out pursuant to this PA will be 

done by or under the direct supervision of a qualified professional(s) in the discipline of 

archaeology who meet[s] the relevant standards outlined in the Secretary of the Interior's 

Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeologists (48 FR 44738-9).

III. TREATMENT MEASURES FOR ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIC PROPERTIES

A. National Park Service (NPS) Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) Level 

II Equivalent Documentation

1. Amtrak will produce documentation of the Sawtooth Bridges that meets the standards 

of the National Park Service (NPS) Level II Historic American Engineering Record 

(HAER) documentation. HAER documentation narratives will describe in detail the 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-4

physical characteristics of the structures (including their engineering, design, and 

setting), and their history, focusing on their construction as part of the Pennsylvania 

Railroad in the early twentieth century. Specific attention will be afforded to 

interpretation of how contemporary engineering and materials science constraints and 

cost considerations affected the final design and construction of the structures. Primary 

and secondary resources will be used in the research effort, including historic 

engineering literature, United States Army Corps of Engineers Reports, Amtrak’s files, 

newspapers and periodicals, library collections, historical societies, and other 

repositories in New York and New Jersey. Narratives will be supported by historic 

plans, photographs, and other documents, where available.

2. The HAER recordation will also include photographic documentation of the Sawtooth

Bridges. Close-up and contextual views will be provided in accordance with the 

standards of the National Park Service (NPS) HAER Level II documentation. The 

documentation will consist of photographs with large-format negatives, photo key map 

and photo list. Photographs will include images of the original engineering plans for 

the Sawtooth bridges. 

3. Digital photography files will also be provided, formatted in accordance with the 

current NPS Heritage Documentation Programs (HDP) photography guidelines. 

Amtrak will consult with NJHPO and NPS Heritage Documentation Programs on the 

final scope, content, format, and disposition of the documentation.

4. Following completion of the HAER documentation, Amtrak will distribute one (1) 

PDF electronic copy of the documentation to FRA, (1) hard copy and one (1) PDF 

electronic copy of the documentation to NJHPO, and (1) hard copy and one (1) PDF 

electronic copy of the documentation to NPS and up to (10) hard copies will be offered

to local and regional repositories such as libraries, historical societies, and other 

collections, to be determined in consultation with NJHPO, as well as to FRA and NJ 

HPO

5. Amtrak will explore whether additional entities such as railroad or industrial history 

organizations that would be willing to post the PDF recordation documents to their 

publicly accessible websites. Amtrak will consult with NJ HPO to identify up to five 

(5) of these potential organizations and associated websites. If an organization does not 

wish to accept or post the file, Amtrak is not required to identify a substitute 

organization.

B. Construction Protection Plan

1. As Project planning progresses and construction limits are finalized, Amtrak will 

prepare and implement a Construction Protection Plan (CPP) to avoid constructionrelated damage to historic properties within close proximity (approximately 100 feet) 

of Project construction activities, likely including the Hudson Tower and/or Substation 

4 (both NR-eligible). The CPP will describe the Project construction procedures in the 

vicinity of historic properties and measures that Amtrak will take to avoid inadvertent 

construction impacts to historic properties. 

2. Amtrak will submit the CPP to NJHPO for review and comment prior to 

implementation in accordance with Stipulation V.

3. Amtrak will provide FRA with copies of all correspondence related to the CPP and a 

copy of the final plan.
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-5

C. Design Review

1. Amtrak will ensure that the preliminary and final plans and specifications for the 

proposed new bridges adhere to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and 

Treatments for Historic Properties and are compatible with the historical character of 

the Pennsylvania Railroad Historic District. 

2. Amtrak will consult with FRA and NJHPO to identify engineering constraints and 

opportunities for incorporating historically compatible design into the preliminary and 

final plans. Amtrak will consult with FRA and NJHPO in the development of bridge 

plans at the preliminary (30 percent) and pre-final (approximately 75 percent), and 

final (100 percent) design stages. 

IV. TREATMENT MEASURES FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

A. If FRA determines that Tribal involvement is warranted, then FRA is responsible for all 

government-to-government consultation with Federally recognized Tribes.

B. When Amtrak advances the Project design and additional information is known regarding 

the specific location of ground disturbing activities and potential sub-surface impacts of 

the Project, Amtrak will ensure those design plans are reviewed by a qualified 

archaeologist, selected by Amtrak. The archaeologist will determine if the Project could 

potentially impact archaeologically sensitive areas at depths where disturbance of 

archaeological materials may be feasible and determine locations, if any, where monitoring 

will be required. In the event that Amtrak’s proposed construction methodology will not 

allow monitoring at depths greater than 10 feet (e.g., in those locations where piles will be 

driven), then no archaeological monitoring will be required.

C. In the event that soil borings are advanced within the Project site for engineering purposes,

such soil borings will be reviewed by a qualified archaeologist selected by Amtrak to 

determine if potentially sensitive alluvial deposits, such as those observed in adjacent 

areas, are present within the Project site. Amtrak will prepare a borings report and

associated curation and recommendations for further work, if applicable, in accordance 

with New Jersey State Standards and submit the report to FRA. The report and 

recommendations will be reviewed by FRA and, upon FRA approval, submitted to NJHPO 

and Tribes, as appropriate, upon completion of boring activities.

D. If Amtrak’s archaeologist, in consultation with FRA and NJHPO, determines that 

archaeological monitoring is warranted based on the results of analyses conducted under 

Stipulations IV.A. or B. above, Amtrak will develop an archaeological monitoring plan in 

consultation with FRA and NJHPO. Any monitoring plan developed in consultation with 

FRA and NJHPO will include provisions for consulting with Indian Tribes, as appropriate, 

in the event of a discovery.

E. If archaeological monitoring is completed, Amtrak will prepare a monitoring report and 

curation in accordance with New Jersey State Standards and submit the report to FRA. The 

monitoring report will be reviewed by FRA and, upon FRA approval, submitted to NJHPO 

and Tribes, as appropriate, at the completion of monitoring activities.

F. If potentially significant archaeological resources are encountered during monitoring, 

Amtrak and FRA will consult with NJHPO and any other consulting parties that wish to 

participate pursuant to 36 CFR 800.4(b) to complete identification efforts and develop 

ways to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate any project effects pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6 as 

defined in the archaeological monitoring work plan in IV.D.
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-6

V. DOCUMENT REVIEW

Unless otherwise stated in the stipulations, the Signatories will provide comments on the 

documents they review as set forth below:

A. The Signatories will have up to thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt to review 

and provide written comments to Amtrak on documents stipulated in this PA.

B. Tribes, when appropriate, will have up to thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt

to review and provide written comments to FRA on documents stipulated in this PA.

C. Amtrak and FRA will ensure any written comments received within the timeframe are 

considered and addressed, as appropriate.

D. If the Signatories or Tribes, do not submit written comments to Amtrak or FRA, as 

applicable, within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of any document, it is understood the 

non-responding Signatories or Tribes have no comments on the submittal.

E. If the Signatories object to or recommend extensive revisions to submissions stipulated in 

the PA, Amtrak will work with FRA expeditiously to respond to the recommendations and 

resolve disputes.

F. If FRA and Amtrak cannot resolve the disputes, and if further consultation with the 

Signatories is deemed unproductive by any Signatory, the Signatories will adhere to the 

dispute resolution procedures described in Stipulation XI. 

G. The Signatories acknowledge that the timeframes set forth in this PA will be the maximum 

allowed under normal circumstances. In exigent circumstances (e.g., concerns over 

construction suspensions or delays), all Signatories agree to expedite their respective 

document review and dispute resolution obligations within seven (7) calendar days.

VI. PROJECT MODIFICATION AND CHANGES

In the event of any modifications or changes to the Project scope, the following measures will be 

implemented through consultation among the Signatories:

A. Amtrak, in coordination with FRA, will assess and revise the Project APE as needed to 

incorporate any additional areas that have the potential to affect historic properties

pursuant to 36 CFR § 800.4(a); upon FRA approval, Amtrak will provide a revised APE to 

NJHPO for review and comment.

B. Amtrak, in coordination with FRA, will carry out additional investigations, as needed, to 

identify architectural and archaeological properties that may be affected pursuant to 36 

CFR § 800.4(b).

C. Amtrak, in coordination with FRA, will evaluate and assess the Project’s effect on historic 

properties pursuant to 36 CFR § 800.4(c)-(d) and 800.5.

D. If a change in Project scope results in additional adverse effects to historic properties,

Amtrak will consult with the other Signatories to explore measures to avoid, minimize, or 

mitigate effects on these properties and amend the PA in accordance with Stipulation XII

and consider whether the identification of and coordination with any additional consulting 

parties is appropriate. 

VII. UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERIES

Amtrak, in coordination with FRA, will develop an Unanticipated Discoveries Plan (UDP) to be 

included in construction and bidding documents and used by the Project contractor in the event 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-7

of unanticipated discoveries or if known historic properties are affected in an unanticipated 

manner. The UDP will incorporate procedures for interacting with the media, a chain of contact, 

stop-work requirements, and other appropriate provisions. Amtrak, in coordination with FRA, 

will submit the draft UDP to the Signatories, participating Federally-recognized Indian Tribes 

and participating Consulting Parties for review and comment in accordance with Stipulation V. 

The UDP will include the following components:

A. In the event any previously unidentified historic architectural or archeological resource is 

discovered, Amtrak will require the contractor to halt all work in and secure the area of the 

discovery. For any discovered archeological resources, Amtrak will also halt work in 

surrounding areas where additional subsurface remains can reasonably be expected to be 

present. This includes establishing a perimeter with a radius of at least 50 feet around a 

discovery where there will be no excavation, operation of heavy machinery, or stockpiling. 

Work in all other Project areas may continue. 

B. Amtrak, in coordination with FRA, will notify the Signatories within twenty-four (24)

hours of the discovery. As appropriate, FRA will also identify and invite Federallyrecognized Indian Tribes and Consulting Parties to consult regarding unanticipated 

discoveries.

C. Amtrak, in consultation with FRA, NJHPO, and other Consulting Parties, if appropriate, 

will investigate the discovery site and evaluate the resource(s) according to the 

professional standards and guidelines contained in Stipulation II. Amtrak will prepare and 

submit to FRA for review and comment: a written document containing a proposed 

determination of NR eligibility of the resource, an assessment of Project effects on historic 

properties, if appropriate, and any recommended treatment measures. Upon FRA’s 

approval, Amtrak will submit the determination of NR eligibility, effects assessment, 

and/or recommended treatment measures document, if appropriate, to NJHPO, Signatories, 

and Consulting Parties, as appropriate, for review and comment. If the potential resource is 

associated with Native American prehistory or history, FRA will provide the 

documentation to the Tribes within five (5) business days for their review with a request 

for comment. The Signatories and other Consulting Parties if applicable, will respond with 

any comments within five (5) business days of receipt. 

D. In the event there is an unanticipated effect to a known historic architectural resource or 

archaeologically sensitive area, Amtrak will notify FRA, Signatories, and participating 

Tribes and Consulting Parties, as appropriate, within forty-eight (48) hours of the event by 

providing written documentation describing the event and the potential effect to the 

historic property. Amtrak will propose treatment measures to FRA for review. Upon FRA’s 

approval, and in coordination with FRA, the Amtrak will submit the recommended 

treatment measures document to NJHPO, Signatories, and participating Tribes and 

Consulting Parties as appropriate, for review and comment. The NJHPO, Signatories, and 

participating Tribes and Consulting Parties will respond with any comments within five (5)

business days of receipt. 

E. If it is necessary to develop treatment measures in accordance with Stipulation VII.C. and 

VII.D., above, Amtrak, in coordination with FRA and NJHPO, implement the treatment 

measures approved by FRA. 

F. Amtrak will ensure ground disturbing activities within the affected area do not proceed 

until FRA, in consultation with the Signatories and participating Tribes and Consulting 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-8

Parties, as appropriate, determines that either 1) the located resource is not NR-eligible or 

2) the agreed upon treatment measures for historic properties have been implemented.

VIII. TREATMENT OF HUMAN REMAINS

A. If human remains are encountered during archaeological investigations or construction, 

Amtrak will immediately halt subsurface disturbance in that portion of the Project area and 

immediately secure and protect the human remains and any associated funerary objects in 

place in such a way that minimizes further exposure or damage to the remains from the 

elements, looting, and/or vandalism. A perimeter with a radius of at least 50 feet around 

human remains will also be established where there will be no excavation, operation of 

heavy machinery, or stockpiling.

B. Amtrak will immediately notify the local police department to determine if the discovery is 

subject to a criminal investigation by law enforcement and notify the Signatories within 

twenty-four (24) hours of the initial discovery.

C. If a criminal investigation is not appropriate, the Amtrak will apply and implement all 

relevant laws, procedures, policies, and guidelines concerning the treatment and 

repatriation of burial sites, human remains, and funerary objects.

D. In the event the human remains encountered could be of Native American origin, whether 

prehistoric or historic, FRA will immediately notify NJHPO, Federally-recognized Indian 

Tribes, and Consulting Parties to determine the treatment plan for the Native American 

human remains and any associated funerary objects. 

E. If the remains are not of Native American origin, Amtrak will, as appropriate, develop a 

research design/treatment plan for the appropriate treatment of the remains and any 

associated artifacts, consistent with procedures and guidelines contained in Stipulation IV 

and in accordance with Stipulation V.

F. Amtrak will not proceed with work in the affected area until FRA, in consultation with 

NJHPO and Tribes, as appropriate, determines that the development and implementation of 

an appropriate research design/treatment plan or other recommended mitigation measures 

are completed. However, work in all other Project areas may continue.

IX. MONITORING AND REPORTING

Once yearly, beginning one (1) year from the date of execution of this PA until it expires or is 

terminated, Amtrak will provide all Signatories to this PA a summary report detailing work 

undertaken pursuant to its terms. Such report will include any scheduling changes proposed, any 

problems encountered, and any disputes and objections received in FRA and Amtrak’s efforts to 

carry out the terms of this PA. Clear evidence of advancing the completion of PA stipulations, 

shared with Signatories, will be considered sufficient reporting in lieu of a summary report.

X. ADOPTABILITY

In the event that another Federal agency, not initially party to this PA receives an application for

financial assistance, permits, licenses, or approvals for the Project, that agency may fulfill its 

Section 106 responsibilities and adopt this PA by (1) stating in writing it concurs with the terms 

of this PA, (2) providing the Signatories an electronic copy of its written concurrence, (3) 

executing a signature page to this PA, and filing the signature with the ACHP, and (4) 

implementing the terms of this PA, as applicable.
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-9

XI. DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Should any Signatory to this PA object at any time to any actions proposed or the manner in 

which the terms of this PA are implemented by providing written notice of such objection to 

FRA, FRA will consult with such Signatory to resolve the objection. If FRA determines that the 

objection cannot be resolved within thirty (30) calendar days FRA will: 

A. Forward all documentation relevant to the dispute, including FRA’s proposed resolution, to 

the ACHP (with a copy to the Signatories) and request that the ACHP provide FRA with its 

advice on the resolution of the objection within forty-five (45) calendar days of receiving 

the documentation. 

B. If the ACHP does not provide its advice regarding the dispute within the forty-five (45) 

calendar day time period, FRA may make a decision on the dispute and proceed 

accordingly. FRA will document its decision in a written response to the objection that 

takes into account any timely comments regarding the dispute from the ACHP and the 

Signatories and provide the ACHP and Signatories with a copy of such written response. 

C. The Signatories remain responsible for carrying out all other actions subject to the terms of 

this PA that are not the subject of the dispute.

XII. AMENDMENTS 

This PA may be amended when such an amendment is agreed to in writing by all Signatories. 

The amendment will be effective on the date that the amendment is signed by all Signatories.

FRA will file the amendment with ACHP.

XIII. TERMINATION 

If any Signatory to this PA determines that its terms will not or cannot be carried out, that 

Signatory will immediately consult with the other Signatories to attempt to develop an 

amendment per Stipulation XII. If within thirty (30) calendar days an amendment cannot be 

reached, any Signatory may terminate the PA upon written notification to the other Signatories.

Once the PA is terminated, and prior to work initiating or continuing on the Undertaking, FRA 

must either (a) execute a new PA pursuant to 36 CFR § 800.6 or (b) request, take into account, 

and respond to the comments of the ACHP under 36 CFR § 800.7. FRA will notify the 

Signatories as to the course of action it will pursue.

XIV. DURATION

This PA will expire when all its stipulations have been completed or in fifteen (15) years from 

the effective date, whichever comes first, unless the Signatories agree in writing to an extension 

in accordance with Stipulation XII. Amendments. 

XV. EXECUTION AND EFFECTIVE DATE

This PA will go into effect on the date that the final Signatory signs the document. Execution of 

this PA by the Signatories and its subsequent filing with the ACHP by FRA demonstrates that 

FRA has taken into account the effect of the Project on historic properties and afforded the 

ACHP an opportunity to comment.
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-10

APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE PAGE FOR 

PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT

AMONG 

THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, 

THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK),

AND

THE NEW JERSEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER 

REGARDING THE 

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

IN HUDSON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

By:__________________________________________ Date:_______________

Marlys Osterhues

Division Chief, Environmental and Corridor Planning 

Office of Railroad Policy and Development 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-11

APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE PAGE FOR 

PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT

AMONG 

THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, 

THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK),

AND

THE NEW JERSEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER 

REGARDING THE 

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

IN HUDSON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

NEW JERSEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER

By:___________________________________________ Date:_______________

Katherine Marcopul

Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-12

APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE PAGE FOR 

PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT

AMONG 

THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, 

THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK),

AND

THE NEW JERSEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER 

REGARDING THE 

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

IN HUDSON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

AMTRAK

By:___________________________________________ Date:_______________

Gerhard Williams

VP Chief Engineer
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-13

ATTACHMENT 1 – AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS
$'#

(&

&!#'!$"#%

Proposed Project Site/Archaeological APEArchitectural APE

Historic PropertiesHistoric Districts

,374./$)(%&+"'156341.+4/5/48-6132*001./#

)FLJ=D 8M>KL=LCHG %

/M@KHG 9HOAJ

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-14

ATTACHMENT 2 – LIST OF INVITED SECTION 106 CONSULTING PARTIES

INVITED CONSULTING PARTIES

Federally-Recognized Indian Tribes

• Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma

• The Delaware Nation

• Delaware Tribe of Indians

• The Oneida Indian Nation

• Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma

• Stockbridge-Munsee Band of Mohican Indians

State-Recognized Indian Tribes

• Nanticoke Indian Association

• Powhatan Renape Nation 

• Ramapough Lenape Indian Nation

• Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape Indians of New Jersey

Other Tribal Organizations

• Eastern Delaware Nation

• Eastern Lenape Nation of Pennsylvania Office and Cultural Center

• Cherokee Nation of New Jersey 

Local Governments and Other Involved Agencies 

• Hudson County Executive

• Hudson County Division of Cultural Affairs & Tourism 

• Hudson County Division of Planning

• New Jersey Turnpike Authority

• New Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection: Historic Preservation

• Town of Harrison Mayor's Office

• Town of Kearny Mayor's Office

Potential Interested Parties

• Anthracite Railroads Historical Society, Inc.

• Consolidated Rail Corporation

• Meadowlands Museum

• New Jersey Meadowlands Commission

• Railway and Locomotive Historical Society, New York Chapter

• National Railway Historical Society, Inc., North Jersey Chapter
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project Programmatic Agreement

PA-15

• Passaic River Coalition

• Pennsylvania Railroad Technical and Historical Society 

• Rail-Marine Information Group 

• Society for Industrial Archaeology, Roebling Chapter 

• Society of Industrial Archaeology, National Headquarters

• Thomas Flagg, Industrial Archaeologist 

• National Railway Historical Society, New York Chapter

• National Railway Historical Society, Tri-State Chapter

• United Railroad Historical Society of New Jersey
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project 

Appendix 1 – C 

CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
DRAFT C-1 November 2018

Appendix 1-C Cultural and Historic Resources

This appendix considers the potential of the Proposed Project to affect historic resources in the 

Proposed Project’s area of potential effect (APE) for architectural and archaeological resources 

(see Figure 3-5). 

A. METHODOLOGY

In consultation with the New Jersey State Historic Preservation Office (NJHPO), APEs for 

architectural and archaeological resources have been delineated to take into account any direct, 

indirect, secondary, and cumulative impacts on these resource types. The APEs for architectural 

and archaeological resources and the methodologies used to assess potential impacts within the 

APEs are described below and shown on Figure 3-5.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES

In general, potential effects to architectural resources can include both direct physical effects 

(e.g., demolition, alteration, or damage from construction on nearby sites) and indirect 

contextual effects, such as the isolation of a property from its surrounding environment, or the 

introduction of visual, audible, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with a property 

or that alter its setting. The APE for architectural resources (shown in Figure 3-5) must 

therefore be large enough to account for locations where proposed construction activities could 

physically alter architectural resources or be close enough to them to potentially cause physical 

damage or visual or contextual impacts. 

The APE for architectural resources for this project is defined as the area surrounding the project 

site within visual range and to account for potential construction-related impacts. The APE for 

architectural resources extends approximately 750 feet from the Proposed Project site. These

boundaries have been delineated to account for potential visual impacts of proposed construction 

activity along the NEC. The proposed structures would not differ substantially from the existing 

Sawtooth Bridges in terms of height or alignment. The elevation of the proposed structures 

would change from the existing elevation by a maximum of five feet. Further, another existing 

railroad bridge, NJ Transit’s Bridge 0.35 (also known as the “Red Bridge”) is located 

immediately south of the Sawtooth Bridges, limiting the visibility of the existing and proposed 

structures from the south.

Once the architectural APE was determined, an inventory of officially recognized historic 

resources within the architectural APE was compiled based on the files of the NJHPO and the 

New Jersey State Museum (NJSM). This inventory includes properties or districts listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and/or the New Jersey State Register (SR), or 

determined eligible for such listing; National Historic Landmarks (NHL); and archaeological 

sites on file at the NJSM. Field surveys were also conducted to identify any potential 

architectural resources (i.e., properties that may be eligible for listing on the NRHP) within the 

architectural APE. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project

DRAFT C-2 November 2018

Once the historic resources in the architectural APE were identified, the effects of the Proposed 

Project on those resources were assessed. In addition to assessing direct and indirect effects 

(described above), Section 106 of the NHPA requires consideration of reasonably foreseeable 

effects that may occur later in time, be further removed in distance, or be cumulative.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The APE for archaeological resources includes the area where subsurface disturbance would 

occur as part of the Proposed Project—the Sawtooth Bridge Replacement Project site itself. To 

assess the archaeological sensitivity of the archaeological APE, a Phase 1A Archaeological 

Documentary Study (Phase 1A) of the project site was prepared by AKRF, Inc. in August 2016.

As part of the Phase 1A, extensive documentary research was conducted to identify the 

development and occupation histories of the archaeological APE during both the prehistoric 

(Native American) and historic periods. The Phase 1A had four goals: 1) to determine the 

likelihood that the project locations were inhabited during the prehistoric or historic periods; 2) 

to determine the likelihood that archaeological resources could have survived intact on the 

project site after development and landscape alteration associated with the construction of the

existing railroad facilities; 3) to make a determination of the project site’s archaeological 

sensitivity; and 4) to make recommendations for additional archaeological investigations where 

necessary. The Phase 1A was submitted to NJHPO for review and comment and its conclusions 

are summarized in this appendix. The Phase 1A is included in Appendix 1-D.

B. BACKGROUND HISTORY

The development and occupation histories of the archaeological APE and surrounding vicinity 

are described in detail in the Phase 1A and are summarized below to provide context for the 

known and potential historic resources discussed later in this appendix.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The archaeological APE is located in the Hackensack Meadowlands District, the tidal and 

freshwater wetlands surrounding the Hackensack and Passaic Rivers in northeastern New Jersey. 

The modern landscape of the archaeological APE is radically different than what was seen a 

century ago, as landfilling has transformed the former marshlands into dry, developable land. 

However, until the existing rail lines were constructed, the archaeological APE was inundated 

marshland. An extended glacial period left the Northeast blanketed in thick ice sheets for 

thousands of years. The retreat of the glaciers caused sea levels to rise and New Jersey’s 

shoreline may have been as much as 85 feet lower and 80 miles away from its present location 

when the first Native Americans arrived in the region (NJHPO 1997). The increase in 

temperatures and rise of sea levels led to the gradual formation of the Meadowlands over many 

thousands of years.

Soil borings completed in the vicinity of the archaeological APE suggest that the ground surface 

prior to inundation/marsh formation was at variable depths across the project site and 

surrounding vicinity (soil borings were reviewed as part of the Phase 1A, see Appendix 1-D). 

The presence of peat or organic silts in many of the borings likely represents what was the 

bottom of the marsh prior to landfilling. Alluvial soils were identified between approximately 10 

and 30 feet below the ground surface (the exact depths varied greatly among the borings) and are 

likely similar to alluvial sands identified as archaeologically sensitive at other nearby 

archaeological sites where deeply buried archaeological resources were identified at similar 
Appendix 1-C: Cultural and Historic Resources

DRAFT C-3 November 2018

depths (Langan 2012). Recommendations for additional archaeological analyses of these soils, if 

present, are outlined below in Section D, “Probable Impacts of the Proposed Project,”

Section E: “Mitigation Measures,” and in the Phase 1A study included as Appendix 1-D.

THE PREHISTORIC PERIOD

Human populations did not inhabit the northeastern United States (including the area that is 

modern New Jersey) until the glaciers began to retreat more than 14,000 years ago and were 

settled in the area by approximately 11,500 years before present (BP). Archaeologists have 

divided the time between the arrival of the first humans in northeastern North America and the 

arrival of Europeans more than 11,000 years later into the following contextual periods: PaleoIndian/Early Archaic (11,500-8,000 before present [BP]), Middle Archaic (8,000-6,000 BP), 

Late Archaic (6,000-3,000 BP), Early/Middle Woodland (3,000 BP–1,200), Late Woodland 

(1,200 BP to AD 1500) and European Intrusion/Contact Period (AD1500-AD 1700).1 These 

divisions are based on certain changes in environmental conditions, technological advancements, 

and cultural adaptations, which are observable in the archaeological record. A full summary of 

the prehistoric occupation of the general area during these time periods is provided in the Phase 

1A.

PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN THE VICINITY

As the archaeological APE and the surrounding area were inundated for many thousands of 

years, little evidence of Native American activity in the area has been identified. A deeply buried 

prehistoric archaeological site (New Jersey State Museum [NJSM] Site 28-HD-44) was 

identified approximately 2,000 feet east of the project site on the western shore of the 

Hackensack River and south of the existing Amtrak tracks (Langan 2012). Archaeological 

resources at that site were identified within alluvial soils located between 9 and 17 feet beneath 

the ground surface. The majority of the finds were from the eastern portion of the site, in close 

proximity to the Hackensack River (ibid). 

DEVELOPMENT AND OCCUPATION OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL APE DURING 

THE HISTORIC PERIOD

Despite the undeveloped nature of the low-lying marshes, Kearny’s location between the 

burgeoning cities of Newark and Jersey City increasingly made the township a convenient 

location for both industrial and commercial use as well as for residential communities. The 

Hackensack and Passaic rivers provided transportation opportunities to local residents and 

businesses, as did the multiple turnpikes, plank roads, and railroads that traversed the area. As a 

result of its location between the major cities of New York and Philadelphia and between New 

England and the southern states, transportation has been a major component of New Jersey’s 

history since the colonial period. New Jersey also supplied products and material to nearby 

cities—including grain, lumber, meat, and other regional exports—and New Jersey’s Atlantic 

coast, its many navigable rivers, and its low-lying land corridors made it possible for myriad 

transportation networks to develop, most of which were oriented in a northeast-southwest 

direction connecting New York City and Philadelphia.

 

1 The date ranges for these prehistoric periods is based on the timeline presented in the “New Jersey 

Statewide Historic Contexts” section of the New Jersey Historic Preservation Plan issued by NJHPO in 

1997.
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project

DRAFT C-4 November 2018

As the 19th century continued, railroads came to dominate transportation and New Jersey was at 

the forefront of railroad construction in the United States. In 1832, the New Jersey Railroad and 

Transportation Company (NJRR) was incorporated to construct a direct rail line across the 

archaeological APE between Trenton, New Jersey and New York City via a terminal and ferry 

located in Jersey City (Van Winkle 1924). The New Jersey Railroad later became part of the 

Pennsylvania Railroad. The Morris & Essex Railroad was chartered in 1835 to connect the New 

Jersey cities of Morristown and Newark. In 1836, the NJRR agreed to carry Morris & Essex 

traffic between Newark and Jersey City. In 1868, the Delaware, Lackawanna, and Western 

Railroad leased the Morris & Essex Railroad, including all of its branches (Lane 1939).

Following the development of the first railroads through the area in the 1860s and 1870s, Kearny 

was transformed from undeveloped meadow to a center of industry. During the last quarter of 

the 19th century, the Kearny Meadowlands experienced rapid industrial development due in part 

to new transportation routes and advances in land-making technology. The Pennsylvania 

Railroad became one of the most powerful rail lines in the northeastern United States at the turn 

of the 20th century. During that time, the rail line expanded its facilities, culminating with the 

construction of tunnels beneath the Hudson River—eliminating the need for ferries for the first 

time—and Pennsylvania Station in Manhattan in 1910 (Jonnes 2007). A new “double” track was 

constructed across the Meadowlands to the northeast towards Weehawken, where the tunnels 

connected to New York’s Pennsylvania Station (Couper 1912). The new tracks crossed the 

meadows and wound around Snake Hill on an elevated embankment and across numerous 

bridges, including the Sawtooth Bridges, which were completed in 1907 (ibid).

The Pennsylvania Railroad transformed train travel in the early 20th century, and by the mid20th century, New Jersey’s transportation was again transformed by the advent of highways and 

motor vehicle traffic. The New Jersey Turnpike was constructed through the center of the 

archaeological APE in the mid-20th century, as the popularity of railroads began to decline. 

C. EXISTING CONDITIONS

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

As described previously, the archaeological sensitivity of the archaeological APE was analyzed 

in a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the archaeological APE that was prepared 

by AKRF, Inc. in August 2016. The conclusions and recommendations of the Phase 1A are

summarized below. The Phase 1A is included in Appendix 1-D. In its letter dated April 3, 2017, 

the NJHPO concurred with the archaeological assessment.

PREHISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY 

The prehistoric sensitivity of project sites in the northeastern United States is generally evaluated 

by a site’s proximity to level slopes, water courses, well-drained soils, and previously-identified 

prehistoric archaeological sites. While the archaeological APE was inundated, it would not have 

been an ideal site for camping or hunting and gathering, or seasonal occupation during the time 

that it was inundated. However, prior to the rise of sea levels several thousands of years ago, the 

site would have been dry land that may have been inhabitable by the earliest groups of humans 

that occupied the region during the prehistoric period. 

The Phase 1A concluded that if undisturbed prehistoric ground surfaces are present at great 

depths beneath the project site, they would be considered to be archaeologically sensitive. 
Appendix 1-C: Cultural and Historic Resources

DRAFT C-5 November 2018

Potential archaeological resources at the Sawtooth Bridges replacement project site would be 

expected to be located at deposits at depths of approximately 10 to 30 feet or more below the 

ground surface, given the depths of alluvial soils and peat deposits as seen in soil borings from 

nearby areas. Given the extent to which railroad-related disturbance likely disturbed those 

depths, the Phase 1A concluded that the archaeological APE has low potential to yield intact 

prehistoric archaeological deposits overall. However, as stated in the Phase 1A, if the soils in 

this area are intact, they could potentially yield archaeological resources associated with the 

prehistoric occupation of the project site. 

HISTORIC PERIOD ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY 

As mentioned previously, the Phase 1A determined that the project site was occupied by 

inundated marshland until the early 19th century when the first railroad tracks were constructed 

through the area. No evidence exists to suggest that the project site was occupied during the 

historic period (including the 17th through the 20th centuries). A single map-documented 

structure not associated with railroad uses was located near the project site in the early 19th 

century. Historic maps indicate that this structure was located within unfilled marsh and it 

appears that this structure may have been used for agricultural purposes. Extensive development 

and redevelopment has occurred within the project site as a result of the construction and reconstruction of various railroad-related structures, including bridges, berms, catenary poles, 

utilities, and other infrastructure. The Phase 1A concluded that the archaeological APE has no 

sensitivity for archaeological resources dating to the historic period.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES

There are five previously identified architectural resources in the Sawtooth Bridges architectural 

APE, all of which have been determined eligible for the NRHP (see Table C-1 and Figure 3-5).

Based on a survey of the architectural APE performed by a qualified architectural historian, no

potential architectural resources (resources that have not been previously surveyed but which 

meet the NRHP Criteria) were identified within the architectural APE.

Pennsylvania Railroad New York to Philadelphia Historic District (Northeast Corridor, 

Pennsylvania to New York, within the architectural APE). The extension of the Pennsylvania 

Railroad, built over the first decade of the twentieth century, consisted of eight miles of electrified 

rail line between Midtown Manhattan and Newark, New Jersey. The same project also included the 

construction of New York Penn Station and a system of railroad tubes beneath the Hudson River 

between New York and New Jersey (completed in 1910). The Pennsylvania Railroad system also 

included several bridges that carry the railroad over water, marsh, and other railroads. The Sawtooth 

Bridges (Amtrak Bridges 7.80 and 7.96) were constructed as part of the Pennsylvania Railroad 

system in 1907. The Sawtooth Bridges were not specifically identified as contributing resources to 

Pennsylvania Railroad New York to Philadelphia Historic District in documentation describing that 

district on file with NJHPO. Furthermore, the historic integrity of the Sawtooth Bridges has been 

compromised due to several substantial repairs to the bridges during the late 20th century. However, 

the bridges are within the boundaries of the Historic District, were constructed during the period of 

significance identified for the Historic District, and relate to historical themes identified as relevant to 

the significance of the Historic District. As stated in NJHPO’s letter dated April 3, 2017, both 

Amtrak Bridge 7.80 and 7.96 are considered contributing resources to the Pennsylvania Railroad 

New York to Philadelphia Historic District. The Pennsylvania Railroad New York to Philadelphia 

Historic District was determined eligible for the NRHP in 2002.
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project

DRAFT C-6 November 2018

Old Main Delaware Lackawanna & Western Railroad (Morris & Essex Rail Line right-ofway from Hudson, Hoboken City, to Warren, Washington Township, and along Warren Railroad 

to the Delaware River; within architectural APE in Kearny). The Delaware Lackawanna & 

Western (DL&W) Railroad was chartered in 1815, to transport anthracite coal from 

Pennsylvania’s Lackawanna Valley to Hoboken where it could be distributed to eastern markets. 

The DL&W Line later offered passenger service, allowing inhabitants of New Jersey towns and 

countryside to access the ferries to New York City located in Hoboken. The DL&W set 

standards for passenger service and safety at the turn of the century, and was the first line to use 

telephones rather than telegraphs for train dispatching. Suburban stations had a distinctive 

standardized design featuring hipped roofs and porches. The NJHPO determined the railroad 

eligible for the NRHP on September 24, 1996.

Table C-1

Architectural Resources within APE

Ref 

No Resource Name Location

Municipality in 

the APE NRHP-Listed NRHP-Eligible

1 Pennsylvania Railroad 

New York to 

Philadelphia Historic 

District

Northeast Corridor, 

Pennsylvania to New York

Kearny & 

Harrison

X

2 Old Main DL&W 

Railroad Historic 

District

Morris & Essex Railroad 

ROW from Hudson, 

Hoboken City, to Warren, 

Washington Twp., and 

along Warren Railroad to 

the Delaware River 

Kearny X

3 Substation 4 Northeast Corridor (former 

Pennsylvania Railroad) at 

New Jersey Turnpike, 

Milepost 7.2

Kearny X

4 Hudson Tower Between Northeast 

Corridor and Morris & 

Essex at eastern boundary 

of Harrison

Kearny X

5 Pennsylvania Railroad 

Bay Branch Historic 

District

Traverses NJ Turnpike and 

Passaic River in APE

Newark and 

Kearny

X

Notes: See Figure 3-5 for reference.

Substation 4 (Northeast Corridor at New Jersey Turnpike, Kearny). The building at Substation 4

is a two-and-a-half-story red brick structure with large round-arched windows and doorways. 

The New Jersey Turnpike is located almost directly above the substation building. The building 

has a large stone plaque set into the façade, inscribed with the words “Sub-Station 4, 

Pennsylvania Railroad.” According to the inventory form completed for this structure, the 

building contains a single room on the basement and second-story levels. The first floor contains 

a workspace and “separate battery and wash rooms for employees.” 

The Meadows Division of the Pennsylvania Railroad (now the Northeast Corridor) was 

completed and put into service in 1910. Substation 4 was built as part of the original DC 

electrical transmission system and supplied electric traction power to this section of the railroad. 

This portion of the railroad was converted to an AC system in the early 1930s. At the time of the 
Appendix 1-C: Cultural and Historic Resources

DRAFT C-7 November 2018

NRHP eligibility assessment for the substation (1994), the structure’s function had already been

replaced by the fenced-in compound designated as Substation 41. NJHPO determined the 

Substation 4 building eligible for the NRHP on September 12, 1994.

Hudson Tower (Northeast Corridor at Milepost 7.2, Kearny). The Hudson Tower was identified 

as NRHP-eligible by NJHPO in 1997 as part of an evaluation of multiple interlocking towers 

along the Northeast Corridor. The NJHPO’s evaluation of the property (on file at NJHPO’s 

offices) noted that interlocking towers represent a “significant and increasingly endangered 

property type,” which are “commonly under-acknowledged in the development and expansion of 

railroads.” The Hudson Tower specifically was determined eligible under Criterion C “as an 

intact example of an early twentieth century railroad signal tower representing the application of 

the ‘automatic safety principle’ to railroad operations to increase reliability and safety.” It was 

also cited as the last remaining element of the former Manhattan Transfer Station, which was the 

point where steam locomotives were replaced with electric locomotives for passage through the 

tunnel to New York’s Penn Station. This complex is significant for its association with the 

electrification of the railroads and was part of a cultural gateway to New York City. Therefore, 

the Hudson Tower was also determined eligible under Criterion A for its association with this 

complex and cultural history. 

Pennsylvania Railroad New York Bay Branch Historic District (Newark and Kearny). Built 

in sections between 1889 and 1904 as part of the PRR’s massive and comprehensive program to 

reach the Port of New York, the PRR New York Bay Branch Historic District (NJHPO Opinion: 

4/22/2005) was determined eligible for the NRHP under Criterion A in the area of transportation 

for its contribution to the state’s industrial, commercial, and urban expansion. The railroad 

became the critical link in both local and regional rail systems, enabling the PRR to secure a 

dominant place in the nation’s busiest port and establishing itself as the country’s largest railroad 

during the twentieth century. The PRR New York Bay Branch Historic District is also eligible 

under Criterion C for its significant engineering and collection of contributing bridges, culverts, 

yards, and surviving overhead electrified catenary system. The railroad’s period of significance 

extends from 1889, when two predecessor railroads of the PRR New York Bay Branch Historic 

District received their corporate charters, to 1945, when the railroad completed the last transfer 

bridge at the contributing Greenville Yard Piers. The boundaries of the eligible historic district 

include the historic right-of-way.

D. NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Absent the Proposed Project, it is assumed that the potentially archaeologically sensitive depths 

within the archaeological APE would remain undisturbed. Therefore, the No Action Alternative 

would not result in impacts on archaeological resources. 

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES

Under the No Action Alternative, the condition of the Sawtooth Bridges would continue to 

deteriorate. Extensive repairs to the Sawtooth Bridges would be necessary to maintain them as 

safe operable structures. These repairs would likely diminish their historic integrity, possibly 

resulting in an adverse effect to the Sawtooth Bridges, even if they were retained rather than 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project

DRAFT C-8 November 2018

demolished. Moreover, the No Action Alternative would not satisfy the Proposed Project’s 

purpose and need.

E. PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

As described above, an adverse archaeological effect is defined as any disturbance or damage to 

a significant archaeological resource. Such an effect could occur if construction were to disturb 

the soil at the same depth where that resource was present. As described previously, the Phase 

1A determined that the archaeological APE has low sensitivity for prehistoric resources at 

depths ranging between 10 to 30 feet and no sensitivity for historic period resources. 

As described in the Phase 1A, if undisturbed prehistoric ground surfaces exist at great depths, 

they may contain archaeological resources that would provide new information about the earliest 

occupation of the Meadowlands area before the rise of sea levels. However, because the 

archaeological APE is located at the confluence of several very active rail corridors, no soil 

borings can be advanced within the boundaries of the project site at this time. Therefore, the 

extent to which the alluvial soils present beneath the project site have survived the deep 

disturbance associated with the construction of the railroads, bridges, and their associated 

utilities is unknown. In those locations where deep disturbance has already occurred, such as the 

locations of the Sawtooth Bridges themselves, it is expected that there is little chance that 

archaeologically sensitive depths would remain intact. However, other areas that have not been 

subjected to deep disturbance, such as the portions of the rail corridor that have been built up 

and do not contain utilities, could contain undisturbed alluvial soils that could contain 

archaeological resources. As recommended in the Phase 1A, when the project design is 

advanced and additional information is known regarding the specific sub-surface impacts of the 

Proposed Project, those plans will be reviewed by a qualified archaeologist. It is expected that 

during the engineering phase, the project team will be able to complete a geophysical 

investigation of the archaeological APE that would involve a series of geotechnical borings. 

Upon the completion of that investigation, the archaeologists’ review of soil boring logs will 

determine if the Proposed Project could potentially impact archaeologically sensitive depths and 

to determine those locations where monitoring will be required, should any exist.

If the alluvial soils are determined to be absent within the archaeological APE, no additional 

archaeological analysis would be required. In the event that soil borings indicate that the 

potentially sensitive alluvial soil layers are present, or if the results are ambiguous, the Phase 1A 

recommended archaeological monitoring for those areas where the construction of the Proposed 

Project would result in disturbance to depths ranging between 10 and 30 feet below the ground 

surface in previously undisturbed areas. No monitoring was recommended in those locations 

where deep disturbance has already occurred, such as within the footprints of the existing 

bridges and in locations where piles have been driven to support the existing tracks. 

Finally, in the event that the proposed construction methodology would not allow an 

archaeologist to monitor the site at depths ranging between 10 and 30 feet below the ground 

surface (e.g., in those locations where piles will be driven), then no archaeological monitoring is

recommended. Prior to any archaeological monitoring, an archaeological monitoring program 

will be developed in consultation with NJHPO to further investigate the archaeological 

sensitivity of those areas.
Appendix 1-C: Cultural and Historic Resources

DRAFT C-9 November 2018

To avoid impacts on archaeological resources, Amtrak will perform additional archaeological 

investigation as appropriate as described above and as outlined in a Memorandum of Agreement 

(MOA) between FRA, NJHPO, and Amtrak.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES

As described below, the Proposed Project will not affect the following architectural resources: 

the Old Main Delaware, Lackawanna, & Western Historic District (NRHP-eligible); Substation 

4 (NRHP-eligible); Hudson Tower (NRHP-eligible); or the Pennsylvania Railroad New York 

Bay Branch Historic District (NRHP-eligible). None of these resources would be directly 

affected by project construction. Furthermore, while the context of these resources would be 

somewhat altered by the removal of the existing Sawtooth Bridges and the construction of new 

bridges carrying the Northeast Corridor, the overall context of these resources is not expected to 

be substantially changed. The Proposed Project would replace existing railroad-related structures 

with new railroad-related structures, and therefore, the use, atmosphere, and overall conditions 

of the resources’ context would remain largely the same.

The Proposed Project would have a direct effect on the Pennsylvania Railroad New York to 

Philadelphia Historic District (NRHP-eligible), since it would result in the removal of the 

Sawtooth Bridges, which are considered a contributing element within that Historic District. As 

set forth in the draft MOA, ongoing consultation will be undertaken among FRA, NJHPO, and 

Amtrak as project engineering proceeds to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects to the 

Pennsylvania Railroad New York to Philadelphia Historic District.

While the Pennsylvania Railroad New York to Philadelphia Historic District retains historic 

integrity overall, it should be noted that the historic district in the architectural APE has 

undergone extensive alterations. In the 1990s, the Kearny Connection was created by linking the 

New Jersey Transit Morristown Line (Morris & Essex Railroad) with the NEC (Hanley 1991).

Other improvements were made in the late-20th and early-21st century as part of the use and 

maintenance of the active rail corridor, including track work, the construction of instrument 

houses and other modifications to allow for high speed rail service at the Kearny Connection and 

the surrounding area (Railway Age 1995). The Portal Signal Tower was demolished in the mid1990s, further altering the fabric of the historic district. In addition to these alterations, numerous 

‘state of good repair’ projects have replaced or repaired rail, ties, ballast, catenary system 

components, and other physical features of the Northeast Corridor in the architectural APE. 

Furthermore, substantial changes were made to the Sawtooth Bridges in 1996 and in 2004, 

including repairs of cracked girders and encasing columns in concrete. In light of the extensive 

recent alterations to the fabric and appearance of the Pennsylvania Railroad New York to

Philadelphia Historic District in the architectural APE, the anticipated effects of the Proposed 

Project would be adverse insofar as they would add to the cumulative alterations of the 

resource’s original fabric and appearance that have occurred in the architectural APE in recent 

decades.

No physical changes are proposed to Substation 4 (NRHP-eligible) or the Hudson Tower; 

however, project-related construction could occur in close proximity to Substation 4, and 

therefore could result in accidental damage to the resource. Ongoing consultation will be 

undertaken among FRA, NJHPO, and Amtrak as project designs progress. As part of this 

consultation, protection measures, in the form of a Construction Protection Plan, will be 

developed in consultation with NJHPO, as set forth in the project’s draft MOA. The 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project

DRAFT C-10 November 2018

Construction Protection Plan will set forth the specific measures to be used, and specifications 

that will be applied, to protect these architectural resources during the construction period. 

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

A number of federally funded projects along the Pennsylvania Railroad New York to 

Philadelphia Historic District are underway and/or in the planning or engineering stages. Some 

of these projects will add to the extensive alterations of the Historic District since the time that it 

was determined NRHP-eligible in on October 2, 2002. The Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement 

Project and other projects along the Northeast Corridor in the area would remove or alter 

features that contribute to the historic character of the Pennsylvania Railroad New York to 

Philadelphia Historic District. In combination with the impacts of these other projects, the 

proposed project would further diminish the integrity of the Historic District. However, 

notwithstanding these incremental changes to the Historic District, the property would remain 

NRHP-eligible. No cumulative impacts on this or other historic properties in the APE have been 

identified.

F. MITIGATION MEASURES

As mandated by Section 106 of the NHPA of 1966, FRA and Amtrak have participated in an 

ongoing consultation process with the NJHPO with respect to potential effects on archaeological 

and architectural resources. As part of this ongoing process, measures have been explored to 

avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to archaeological and architectural resources. 

Development of these measures is set forth in a draft MOA, to be executed by FRA, NJHPO, 

and Amtrak as part of this NEPA documentation. The draft MOA (see Appendix 1-B) includes 

the following provisions:

• Amtrak will produce documentation of the Sawtooth Bridges that is consistent with the 

standards of the NPS Level II Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) 

documentation. 

• Amtrak will prepare and implement a Construction Protection Plan (CPP) to avoid 

construction-related damage to historic properties within close proximity to Proposed 

Project activities.

• Amtrak will ensure that the preliminary and final plans and specifications for the 

proposed new bridges adhere to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and 

Treatments for Historic Properties and are compatible with the historical character of 

the Pennsylvania Railroad Historic District. 

• Amtrak will consult with FRA and NJHPO in the development of bridge plans at the 

preliminary (30 percent) and pre-final (approximately 75 percent) design stages.

• Amtrak will reevaluate the period of significance for the Pennsylvania Railroad New 

York to Philadelphia Historic District.

• If Amtrak’s archaeologist, in consultation with FRA and NJHPO, determines that 

archaeological monitoring is warranted, Amtrak will develop an archaeological 

monitoring plan in consultation with FRA and NJHPO. Any monitoring plan developed 

in consultation with NJHPO will include provisions for consulting with Indian Tribes, as 

appropriate, in the event of a discovery.
Appendix 1-C: Cultural and Historic Resources

DRAFT C-11 November 2018

• If potentially significant archaeological resources are encountered during monitoring, 

Amtrak and FRA will consult with NJHPO pursuant to 36 CFR 800.4(b) to complete 

identification efforts.

G. REFERENCES

AKRF, Inc.

2015 “Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study: Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project; 

Kearny, Hudson County, New Jersey.” August 2016. Prepared for the National Railroad 

Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), Philadelphia, PA.

Couper, William

1912 History of the Engineering Construction and Equipment of the Pennsylvania Railroad 

Company’s New York Terminal and Approaches. New York: Isaac Blanchard Co.

Grumet, Robert S.

1981 Native American Place Names in New York City. New York: Museum of the City of 

New York.

Hanley, Robert

1991 “New Jersey to Add Trains to Midtown.” In, The New York Times. May 1, 1991: page B2. 

New York, NY.

Jonnes, Jill

2007 Conquering Gotham: A Gilded Age Epic: The Construction of Penn Station and Its 

Tunnels. New York: Viking.

Lane, Wheaton J. 

1939 From Indian Trail to Iron Horse: Travel and Transportation in New Jersey, 1620-1860. 

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Langan Engineering & Environmental Services

2012 “Archaeological Monitoring Report During Construction of the Slurry Wall for the 

Standard Chlorine Chemical Company Site, Interim Response Action Workplan, Town 

of Kearny, Hudson County, New Jersey.” Prepared for Peninsula Restoration Group for 

submission to the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the State of New 

Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Historic Preservation Office. 

Marshall, Stephen

2004 “The Meadowlands Before the Commission: Three Centuries of Human Use and 

Alteration of the Newark and Hackensack Meadows.” In, Urban Habitats 2(1): pp. 4 to 

27.

New Jersey Historic Preservation Office [NJHPO]

1997 New Jersey Historic Preservation Plan. Trenton: Department of Environmental 

Protection; Division of Parks & Forestry, Historic Preservation Office. 

Railway Age

1995 “The Railway Market.” In, Railway Age. 196(6): page 8.

Van Winkle, Daniel, editor-in-chief

1924 History of the Municipalities of Hudson County, New Jersey 1630-1923. Volume I. New 

York and Chicago: Lewis Historic Publishing Company, Inc. 


Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project 

Appendix 1 – D 

PHASE 1A ARCHAEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTARY STUDY
Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study: 

Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project 

Kearny, Hudson County, New Jersey 

Prepared for: 

National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) 

30th Street Station 

2955 Market Street, 5th Floor South 

Philadelphia, PA 19104 

Prepared by: 

AKRF, Inc. 

440 Park Avenue South, 7th Floor 

New York, New York 10016 

August 2016 
i 

Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 

The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is proposing the Sawtooth Bridges Replacement 

Project in the Town of Kearny and the Town of Harrison in Hudson County, New Jersey (see Figure 1). 

The project would involve the replacement of Amtrak Bridges No. 7.80 and No. 7.96, which are 

collectively referred to as the “Sawtooth Bridges.” Amtrak Bridge No. 7.80 carries Amtrak’s Northeast 

Corridor (NEC) over four New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ TRANSIT) rail tracks that serve the 

Morris & Essex Line. Amtrak Bridge No. 7.96 carries the NEC over one Port Authority Trans-Hudson 

Corporation (PATH) Newark–World Trade Center (WTC) rail track and one Conrail Center Street 

Branch rail track. The Sawtooth Bridges are located along a critical segment of the NEC between 

Newark, New Jersey and New York, New York. The project site includes an approximately 1.1-mile long 

segment of the NEC in Harrison and Kearny, New Jersey, located roughly between mile post (MP) 8.3 on 

the west end (Hudson Interlocking) and MP 7.2 (Swift Interlocking) on the east end. 

This document has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); the 

New Jersey Register of Historic Places Act (NJSA); Section 4(f) of the United States Department of 

Transportation (DOT) Act; and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as 

amended) and associated implementing regulations in 36 C.F.R. 800. Per Subpart A, Section 800.2(a)(3) 

and 800.2(c)(4) of 36 C.F.R. 800, FRA is authorizing the project sponsors, as an applicant for federal 

approvals, to prepare information, analyses, and recommendations regarding Section 106 consultation for 

the referenced project. Copies of this report will be on file at Amtrak, FRA, and NJHPO. 

CONCLUSIONS 

As part of the background research for this Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study, various 

primary and secondary resources were analyzed, including historic maps and atlases, historic photographs 

and lithographs, newspaper articles, and local histories. 

PREHISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT 

The prehistoric sensitivity of project sites in the northeastern United States is generally evaluated by a 

site’s proximity to level slopes, water courses, well-drained soils, and previously-identified prehistoric 

archaeological sites. The project site was historically inundated tidal marsh that was filled as the site was 

converted for rail use. The project site would therefore not have been an ideal site for camping or hunting 

and gathering, or seasonal occupation during the time that it was inundated. However, prior to the rise of 

sea levels several thousands of years ago, the site would have been dry land that may have been 

inhabitable by the earliest groups of humans that occupied the region during the prehistoric period. Soil 

borings suggest that the boundary between alluvial soils and glacial till, possibly representing the premarsh ground surface within the project site, is situated between 10 and 30 feet below the current ground 

surface. It is therefore possible that a precontact ground surface could have been located at that depth at 

one time. However, such a ground surface may have been extensively disturbed as a result of disturbances 

associated with driving piles and constructing deep foundations to support the rail structures within the 

landfill. 
ii

If undisturbed prehistoric ground surfaces are present at great depths beneath the project site, they would 

be considered to be archaeologically sensitive. Given the extent to which railroad-related disturbance 

likely disturbed those depths, the project site is determined to have low potential to yield intact prehistoric 

archaeological deposits at depths of approximately 10 to 30 feet or more below the ground surface. If the 

soils in this area were intact, they could potentially yield archaeological resources associated with the 

prehistoric occupation of the project site. 

HISTORIC PERIOD ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT 

The project site was occupied by inundated marshland until the early 19th century when the first railroad 

tracks were constructed through the area. No evidence exists to suggest that the project site was occupied 

during the historic period with the exception of a possibly nursery/seed production facility. Extensive 

development and redevelopment has occurred within the project site as a result of the construction and reconstruction of various railroad-related structures, including bridges, berms, catenary poles, utilities, and 

other infrastructure. The project site is therefore determined to have no sensitivity for archaeological 

resources dating to the historic period. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The project site has been determined to have low sensitivity for prehistoric resources at depths greater 

than 10 to 30 feet and no sensitivity for historic period resources. If undisturbed prehistoric ground 

surfaces exist at great depths, they may contain archaeological resources that would provide new 

information about the earliest occupation of the Meadowlands area before the rise of sea levels. However, 

because no soil borings can be advanced within the boundaries of the project site, the extent to which the 

alluvial soils present beneath the project site have survived the deep disturbance associated with the 

construction of the railroads, bridges, and their associated utilities is unknown. In those locations where 

deep disturbance has already occurred, such as the locations of the Sawtooth Bridges themselves, it is 

expected that there is little chance that archaeologically sensitive depths would remain intact. However, 

other areas that have not been subjected to deep disturbance, such as the portions of the rail corridor that 

have been built up and do not contain utilities, could contain undisturbed alluvial soils that could contain 

archaeological resources. 

Archaeological monitoring is recommended for those areas where the construction of the proposed 

project would result in disturbance to depths greater than 10 feet below the ground surface in previously 

undisturbed areas. No monitoring is recommended in those locations where deep disturbance has already 

occurred, such as within the footprints of the existing bridges and in locations where piles have been 

driven to support the existing tracks. When the project design is advanced and additional information is 

known regarding the specific sub-surface impacts of the Proposed Project, those plans will be reviewed 

by a qualified archaeologist. The archaeologist will determine if the Proposed Project could potentially 

impact archaeologically sensitive depths and to determine those locations where monitoring will be 

required, should any exist. In the event that soil borings can be advanced within the project site, they 

should also be reviewed by an archaeologist to determine if potentially sensitive alluvial deposits such as 

those observed in adjacent areas are present within the project site to further clarify those locations that 

would require archaeological monitoring during construction. Finally, in the event that the proposed 

construction methodology would not allow an archaeologist to monitor the site at depths greater than 10 

feet (e.g., in those locations where piles will be driven), then no archaeological monitoring is 

recommended. Prior to any archaeological monitoring, an archaeological monitoring program will be 

developed in consultation with NJHPO to further investigate the archaeological sensitivity of those areas. 
iii 

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary 

Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology ................................................................................ 1 

A. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 

B. Proposed Project Description ............................................................................................. 1 

C. Historic Districts Within the Project Site ........................................................................... 2 

D. Research Goals and Methodology ..................................................................................... 3 

Chapter 2: Background Research ............................................................................................... 5 

A. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 5 

B. Environmental and Physical Settings ................................................................................. 5 

Geology and Bedrock ............................................................................................................. 5 

Hydrology ............................................................................................................................... 5 

Topography ............................................................................................................................ 6 

Soils ........................................................................................................................................ 7 

C. Regional Paleoenvironment ............................................................................................... 8 

D. Environmental Changes During the Historic Period .......................................................... 8 

Exploitation of Resources in the Historic Period ................................................................... 9 

Landscape Transformation in the 19th and 20th Centuries .................................................... 9 

E. Current Project Site Conditions ....................................................................................... 10 

F. Previous Cultural Resources Investigations in the Vicinity ............................................. 11 

Portal Bridge ........................................................................................................................ 11 

Access to the Region’s Core (ARC) ..................................................................................... 12 

Standard Chlorine Chemical Site: Archaeological Monitoring ............................................ 12 

Chapter 3: Prehistoric Period .................................................................................................... 13 

A. Prehistoric Context........................................................................................................... 13 

Paleo-Indian Period (11,500 to Approximately 10,000 Years BP) ...................................... 13 

Archaic Period (Approximately 10,000 to 3,000 Years BP) ................................................ 14 

Woodland Period (3,000 BP-AD 1500) ............................................................................... 15 

European Intrusion/Contact Period (AD 1500-1700) ........................................................... 15 

B. Previously Identified Native American Archaeological Sites ......................................... 17 

Chapter 4: the Historic Period ................................................................................................... 19 

A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 19 

B. Historical Context for the Project Site ............................................................................. 19 

The Early History of Harrison and Kearny .......................................................................... 19 

The Construction of Railroads and Rise of Industry in the 19th Century ............................ 20 

Expansion and Modernization of the Railroad in the 20th Century ..................................... 22 

C. The Development History of the Project Site .................................................................. 22 

Agricultural Cultivation Within the Meadows ..................................................................... 23 

Railroad Expansion .............................................................................................................. 24 

The Rise of Industry ............................................................................................................. 25 

Chapter 5: Conclusions, Interpretations, and Recommendations .......................................... 27 

A. Sensitivity Assessment..................................................................................................... 27 

Disturbance Assessment ....................................................................................................... 27 

Prehistoric Sensitivity Assessment ....................................................................................... 27 

Historic Sensitivity Assessment ........................................................................................... 28 

B. Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 28 

References .................................................................................................................................... 30 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

iv

Figures 

Photographs

Appendix A: Qualifications

Appendix B: Soil Borings Completed as Part of Previous Projects in the Vicinity of the Archaeological 

 APE

List of Tables

Table 1 Project Area Soils ........................................................................................................................... 7 

Table 2 Previously Identified Prehistoric Archaeological Sites ................................................................ 17 

List of Figures 

Figure 1: USGS Quad Maps Showing the Project Location 

Figure 2: Aerial Photograph Showing Historic Districts 

Figure 3: Ca. 1844-1845 Hassler Coastal Survey 

Figure 4: USDA Soils Map 

Figure 5: 1860 Walling Map 

Figure 6: 1898 USGS Map 

List of Photographs 

See Figure 2 for camera angle 

Photograph 1: View west from the northern side of the project site; one of the Sawtooth Bridges is 

located at the left of the photo, leading to the elevated embankment that carries the NEC 

line and south of the built-up area on which the NJ TRANSIT tracks are located. 

Photograph 2: View east from the northern side of the project site towards one of the Sawtooth Bridges 

(at the center of the photograph). 

Photograph 3: View east from a point near the western end of the project site, showing the changes in 

grade along the NEC (at left) and the NJ TRANSIT lines (center). 

Photograph 4: Looking west at the western end of the project site. The elevated embankment that carries 

the NEC line (at right) slopes down towards the ground surface in this location. 

Photograph 5: View south of the change in grade between the NEC and the NJ TRANSIT tracks in the 

vicinity of a brick and concrete drainage culvert that carries Frank’s Creek to the Passaic 

River. 

Photograph 6: The northern side of the project site in the vicinity of the New Jersey Turnpike Viaduct, 

with Substation No. 4 visible in the background of the photograph. 
1

Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology

A. INTRODUCTION 

The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is proposing the Sawtooth Bridges Replacement 

Project in the Town of Kearny and the Town of Harrison in Hudson County, New Jersey (see Figure 1). 

The project would involve the replacement of Amtrak Bridges No. 7.80 and No. 7.96 which are 

collectively referred to as the “Sawtooth Bridges.” Amtrak Bridge No. 7.80 carries Amtrak’s Northeast 

Corridor (NEC) over four New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ TRANSIT) rail tracks that serve the 

Morris & Essex Line. Amtrak Bridge No. 7.96 carries the NEC over one Port Authority Trans-Hudson 

Corporation (PATH) Newark–World Trade Center (WTC) rail track and one Conrail Center Street 

Branch rail track. The Sawtooth Bridges are located along a critical segment of the NEC between 

Newark, New Jersey and New York, New York. The project site includes an approximately 1.1-mile long 

segment of the NEC in Harrison and Kearny, New Jersey, located roughly between mile post (MP) 8.3 on 

the west end (Hudson Interlocking) and MP 7.2 (Swift Interlocking) on the east end. The project is just 

north of a bend in the Passaic River. 

The Sawtooth Bridges were constructed in 1907 and are nearing the end of their functional life. Efforts 

were made to rehabilitate the bridges in the 1980s, however, recent inspections have indicated that the 

Sawtooth Bridges continue to deteriorate and exhibit fatigue. Amtrak conducted an inspection and 

condition survey in 2013, which found the Sawtooth Bridges to be in poor to very poor condition with 

some components that might be characterized as serious and in need of replacement (Portal Partners 

2013a). The increasing age of the Sawtooth Bridges, their structural condition, and their two speedrestricted tracks limit the efficiency and reliability of rail operations along the bridges and in this segment 

of the NEC. In addition, demand for rail service along the NEC is at record levels. The NEC cannot 

continue to readily accommodate this rising demand without difficulties due to infrastructure that is 

highly constrained and in need of repair. The replacement of the Sawtooth Bridges is critical to Amtrak 

and other users of the NEC as well as to adjacent railroads.

This document has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); the 

New Jersey Register of Historic Places Act (NJSA); Section 4(f) of the United States Department of 

Transportation (DOT) Act; and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as 

amended) and associated implementing regulations in 36 C.F.R. 800. Per Subpart A, Section 800.2(a)(3) 

and 800.2(c)(4) of 36 C.F.R., FRA is authorizing the project sponsors, as an applicant for federal 

approvals, to prepare information, analyses, and recommendations regarding Section 106 consultation for 

the referenced project. The principle investigator for this Phase 1A Archeological Documentary Study 

was Elizabeth D. Meade, MA, RPA (see Appendix A). Portions of the report were researched and written 

by Molly McDonald, MA, RPA and additional research assistance was provided by JoLayne S. Morneau, 

MS. 

B. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION 

The project site is located in the Hackensack Meadowlands District in northeastern New Jersey. The area 

of potential effect (APE) for archaeological resources includes all areas that could experience ground 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

2

disturbance under the Proposed Project alternatives (see Figures 1 and 2). The project site analyzed in 

this Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study therefore includes those portions of the NEC that will 

be subjected to subsurface impacts as part of the Proposed Project (described below). 

The Proposed Project will include the decommissioning and removal of the Sawtooth Bridges; an 

increase in the number of tracks from two to four; and the construction of three new bridges along the 

NEC to enhance its efficiency, speed, and reliability. The three new bridges will include: 1) a single-track 

viaduct to carry Morris & Essex Line Track 5; 2) a two-track viaduct to carry NEC Tracks 3 and 4 (and to 

temporarily carry NEC Tracks 2 and 3 during the construction period); and 3) a two-track viaduct to carry 

NEC Tracks 1 and 2. Other adjustments to various NEC railroad elements will be necessary, including the 

relocation of interlockings and crossovers; the realignment of Conrail’s Center Street Branch; and the 

installation of new catenary supports and catenary poles. 

Amtrak, NJ TRANSIT, Conrail, and PATH each own various parcels in the project area. The Sawtooth 

Bridges Replacement Project would be constructed entirely within existing railroad right-of-way. No 

residential or business displacements would occur. The project will require property acquisition among 

railroads, as well as easements across various property types, as follows: 

 The relocated NJ TRANSIT Track 5 will partially be on property owned by Conrail. This property 

will likely be purchased from Conrail for NJ TRANSIT; 

 Proposed Tracks 3 and 4 (temporary Tracks 3 and 2) will require aerial or bridge easements from NJ 

TRANSIT, PATH, and Conrail; 

 Track alignments will pass under the New Jersey Turnpike, which has easements over the NEC;

 Two gas valving facilities owned by Williams-Transco and PSE&G will need to be relocated; 

 Third-party fiber optic lines will need to be temporarily relocated, requiring a temporary construction 

easement from the Town of Kearny; and 

 Right-of-entry permits with adjacent railroads and temporary access permits with the New Jersey 

Turnpike Authority will be required to access the site for construction. 

There are four foundation types that were evaluated for the proposed Sawtooth Bridge replacement 

structures new north and south viaducts and retaining walls, including: spread footings, driven pipe piles, 

drilled shafts and micropiles. Spread footings may be suitable for support of some types of retaining 

walls. For the viaduct structure, deep foundations are a more suitable option. Micropiles are a wellsuited alternative because subsurface disturbance to those facilities are minimized in comparison to 

drilled shafts and driven steel pipe piles. 

C. HISTORIC DISTRICTS WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE

The project site is partially located within two historic districts that are eligible for listing on the State and 

National Registers (S/NR) of Historic Places (see Figure 2). The first is the Pennsylvania Railroad New 

York to Philadelphia Historic District, which covers the tracks of Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor between 

Pennsylvania and New York. The 8-mile electrified rail extension of the Pennsylvania Railroad was built 

during the first decade of the 20th century between Midtown Manhattan and Newark, New Jersey. The 

development project also included the construction of New York Pennsylvania Station (PSNY) and a 

system of railroad tubes beneath the Hudson River between New York and New Jersey, completed in 

1910, which was an engineering marvel that changed the nature of railroad operations in New York City 

and the surrounding region. The Pennsylvania Railroad system also included several bridges, including 

the Sawtooth Bridges, which carry the railroad over water, marsh, and other railroads. The Pennsylvania 

Railroad New York to Philadelphia District, now known as the Northeast Corridor, was determined to be 

S/NR-eligible by NJHPO in 2002.
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology 

3

The second historic district, which covers a smaller portion of the project site, is the Old Main Delaware 

Lackawanna & Western Rail Road (DL&WRR) Historic District on the Morris & Essex Rail Line rightof-way now operated by NJ TRANSIT. The DL&WRR was chartered in 1815 and was initially 

constructed to transport anthracite coal from Pennsylvania’s Lackawanna Valley to Hoboken where it 

could be distributed to eastern markets. The portion of the DL&WRR that runs between Newark and New 

York City was constructed in the early 1860s and became incorporated into the DL&WRR in 1868. The 

DL&WRR Line later offered passenger service, allowing inhabitants of New Jersey towns and 

countryside to access the ferries to New York City located in Hoboken. The DL&WRR set standards for 

passenger service and safety at the turn of the 20th century, and was the first line to use telephones rather 

than telegraphs for train dispatching. Suburban stations had a distinctive standardized design featuring 

hipped roofs and porches. The NJHPO determined that the DL&WRR Historic District is S/NR-eligible 

on September 24, 1996. 

D. RESEARCH GOALS AND METHODOLOGY 

The following Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the Sawtooth Bridges Replacement 

project site has been designed to follow the guidelines and standards for archaeological investigations 

issued by NJHPO. The study documents the development history of the proposed project site as well as 

its potential to yield archaeological resources, including both prehistoric and historic cultural resources. In 

addition, this report documents the current conditions of the project site and previous cultural resource 

investigations that have taken place in the vicinity. 

This Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study has four major goals: (1) to determine the likelihood 

that the project site was occupied during the prehistoric (i.e., Native American) and/or historic periods; 

(2) to determine the effect of subsequent development and landscape alteration on any potential 

archaeological resources that may have been located at the project site; (3) to make a determination of the 

project site’s potential archaeological sensitivity; and (4) to make recommendations for further 

archaeological analysis, if necessary. The steps taken to fulfill these goals are explained in greater detail 

below. 

The first goal of this documentary study is to determine the likelihood that the project locations were 

inhabited during the prehistoric or historic periods and identify any activities that may have taken place 

on the project site that would have resulted in the deposition of archaeological resources. In order to 

determine the likelihood of the project site’s occupation during the prehistoric and historic periods, 

documentary research was completed to establish a chronology of the project site’s development, 

landscape alteration, and to identify any individuals who may have owned the land or worked and/or 

resided there, and to determine if buildings were present on the project locations in the past. 

Data was gathered from various published and unpublished primary and secondary resources, such as 

historic maps, topographical analyses (both modern and historic), historic photographs, newspaper 

articles, local histories, and previously conducted archaeological surveys. These published and 

unpublished resources were consulted at various repositories. Online textual archives, such as Google 

Books and the Internet Archive Open Access Texts, were also accessed. Information concerning known 

and potential archaeological resources in the project site was obtained through a review of previously 

conducted cultural resource investigations performed in the project site vicinity, listings of previously 

identified archaeological sites on file at the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office (NJHPO) and the 

New Jersey State Museum (NJSM). Finally, a site walkover was conducted to observe current site 

conditions, including any visible evidence of past disturbance. 

The second goal of this Phase 1A study is to determine the likelihood that archaeological resources could 

have survived intact on the project site after development and landscape alteration (i.e., erosion, grading, 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

4

filling, etc.). Potential disturbance associated with paving and utility installation was also considered. 

Historic maps documenting structures on the project location were analyzed and historic and current 

topographical maps were compared to determine the extent to which the project locations have been 

disturbed. After identifying the likelihood that archaeological resources were deposited on the project site 

and the likelihood that they could remain intact given subsequent development and landscape alteration, a 

sensitivity determination was made for the project locations for both prehistoric and historic period 

resources. 

The third goal of this study was to make a determination of the project site’s archaeological sensitivity. 

The “Guidelines for Phase 1 Archaeological Investigations” issued by NJHPO1 indicate that four 

categories of sensitivity should be considered: No sensitivity; low sensitivity; medium/moderate 

sensitivity; and high sensitivity. For the purposes of this study, those terms are defined as follows: 

 No Sensitivity: Those locations that have been sufficiently disturbed to the extent that archaeological 

resources could not survive intact. 

 Low: Areas of low sensitivity are those where the original topography would suggest that Native 

American sites would not be present (i.e., locations at great distances from fresh and salt water 

resources), locations where no historic activity occurred before the installation of municipal water and 

sewer networks, or those locations determined to be sufficiently disturbed so that archaeological 

resources are not likely to remain intact. 

 Medium/Moderate: Areas with topographical features that would suggest Native American 

occupation, documented historic period activity, and with some disturbance, but not sufficient 

disturbance to eliminate the possibility that archaeological resources are intact on the project site. 

 High: Areas with topographical features that would suggest Native American occupation, documented 

historic period activity, and minimal or no documented disturbance. 

As mentioned above, the fourth goal of this study was to make recommendations for additional 

archaeological investigations where necessary. Phase 1B testing is generally warranted for areas 

determined to have moderate sensitivity or higher. Archaeological testing is designed to determine the 

presence or absence of archaeological resources that could be impacted by a proposed project. Should 

they exist at the project locations, such archaeological resources could provide new insight into the 

prehistoric occupation of the Passaic River waterfront, the transition from Native American to European 

settlement, or the historic period occupation of the project site. 

 

1

 Accessible at: http://www.nj.gov/dep/hpo/1identify/arkeoguide1.htm. 
5

Chapter 2: Background Research

A. INTRODUCTION 

This chapter provides a summary of background research that was completed to identify and define the 

environmental context and physical setting of the project site (including geology, topography, soils, and 

hydrology); the characteristics of the Paleoenvironment (the physical setting prior to the time of European 

settlement); the site’s current conditions and vegetation; and a brief description of previous archaeological 

investigations that have taken place in the vicinity. Additional, more extensive background research was 

completed to identify the occupation and development histories of the project site during the prehistoric 

and historic periods. That information is summarized in greater detail in Chapter 3: Prehistoric Period

and Chapter 4: The Historic Period. 

B. ENVIRONMENTAL AND PHYSICAL SETTINGS 

GEOLOGY AND BEDROCK 

The project site is located within the Newark Basin portion of New Jersey’s Piedmont Physiographic 

Province (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection [NJDEP] 1999). This area is 

characterized by the Meadowlands of the Hackensack River Valley. The project site is located in a 

lowland area characterized by recent “beach and estuarine deposits” dating to the Holocene, beginning 

around 12,000 years ago, concurrent with the arrival of the first humans in the region (ibid). Also called 

the “Newark Basin,” bedrock in the area “consists mainly of gently inclined strata of Upper Triassic red 

sandstones and shales, but includes interbedded green and black shales and some conglomerates” 

(Schuberth 1968: 14). 

The Meadowlands area is surrounded by bedrock dating to the Triassic and Jurassic periods and was 

formed between approximately 230 to 190 million years ago (Schuberth 1968). To the north and west of 

the APE, bedrock is characterized by siltstone, shale, sandstone, and conglomerate sedimentary rock and 

to the east, the bedrock is composed of diabase (ibid). To the northeast of the site, on the eastern side of 

the Hackensack River, is Snake Hill, a diabase rock outcrop that is part of the Bergen Ridge. Snake Hill 

and a second, smaller hill known as Little Snake Hill located to the southeast, represent “two small 

intrusive plugs...[that] probably represent small offshoot stringers of diabasic magma that departed from 

the major Palisades igneous mass as it moved into the Newark Strata” (ibid: 153). The diabase intrusions 

stand significantly higher than the surrounding lowlands largely as a result of diabase’s resistance to 

erosion, as compared to the sandstone of the areas to the west (ibid). 

HYDROLOGY 

The project site is situated on the northern shore of the Passaic River, approximately 1.5 miles north of its 

confluence with the Hackensack River and Newark Bay. As described above, the site is located within the 

Meadowlands, which were named for the thick tracts of tidally-inundated salt marsh that covered the area 

surrounding the confluence of the Passaic and Hackensack Rivers. The existing Cedar Creek Marsh is 

located to the north and south of the eastern portion of the project site. The creek that drains the marshes 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

6

into the Passaic River runs beneath the railroad tracks through a culvert in this location (Portal Partners 

2013b). Additional wetlands are mapped in the vicinity of the project site to the west of the New Jersey 

Turnpike (ibid). 

Historic maps—including the 1844-1845 Hassler coastal survey (see Figure 3), the 1844 and 1847 Smith 

maps, the 1849 Sidney map, and the 1873 Hopkins map—depict the low-lying area before landfilling 

dramatically changed the landscape in the vicinity. While significant portions of the marsh were filled as 

part of transportation projects (including rail and highway corridors), portions of the Meadowlands 

remain inundated, including areas to the north and south of the central and eastern portions of the project 

site (see Figure 1). Maps published in the late 19th and early 20th century (e.g., the 1891 Bien and 

Vermule atlas and the 1891 and 1900 USGS maps) reflect the filling of the area immediately surrounding 

the project site on the northern side of the Passaic River, although mid-20th century USGS maps again 

depict portions of that area as tidal marsh. 

Maps depict two substantial creeks that drained the marshland, “Frank’s Creek,” near the western end of 

the project site, and an unnamed creek near the eastern end that is now part of the Cedar Creek Marshes. 

Frank’s Creek was a substantial stream that extended several miles north of the Passaic River. Portions of 

the creek are still extant and in the vicinity of the project site, the creek runs through a culvert beneath the 

railroad tracks. Railroad uses in the surrounding area caused significant changes to the stream, and by the 

early 20th century it was: 

...crossed near the mouth by a great railway grade, bearing the four regular tracks of the 

Pennsylvania Railroad, the two regular tracks of the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western 

Railroad, and a number of siding tracks. The creek penetrates this grade through a 

concrete culvert which has an upstream opening twelve feet wide and six feet high. In this 

opening are fitted two large tide gates, by means of which the water passes out at low 

tide...IN addition to the interference which the various grades crossing it set up...the 

creek is called upon to drain a very much larger area than formerly, and to make matters 

still worse it is expected to carry the raw sewage of Kearny from that town to the Passaic 

River. The natural and normal result followed—the channel of Frank Creek became filled 

with sediment and the sewage spread over sections of the marsh along the banks (New 

Jersey State Agricultural Experiment Station 1914: 412-413).

The Hackensack and Passaic Rivers originally contained a sufficient quantity of fresh water that they 

were used as cattle watering locations (Marshall 2004). The saline content of the rivers increased during 

the 19th and 20th centuries as a result of engineering projects (e.g., the construction of dams and mill 

ponds) that altered the rivers’ course (ibid). Fresh water was further depleted after the Hackensack Water 

Company began pumping water from the area to neighboring cities (ibid). In the early 20th century, 

larger-scale dams were constructed in the Hackensack River watershed as the local population expanded 

and required increased water supply (ibid). The increase in salinity resulted in a change in the plant life in 

the area over the last two centuries; fresh-water plants, such as common reed (Phragmities australis), 

have been replaced by salt-water plants, such as cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) (ibid). By the late 20th 

century, the Meadowlands had earned a negative reputation, as an unhealthy and largely unproductive 

wasteland, unusable for agriculture or development.

TOPOGRAPHY 

The modern landscape of the project site is radically different than what was seen a century ago, as 

landfilling has transformed the former marshlands into dry, developable land. West of the New Jersey 

Turnpike, the tracks of Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor, along the southern side of the project site, run along 

an artificial, elevated berm and the Sawtooth Bridges. The berm slopes down towards the adjacent grade 
Chapter 2: Background Research 

7

near the western end of the project site. To the north of these elevated tracks and passing beneath the 

Sawtooth Bridges, the existing tracks of the NJ TRANSIT Morris & Essex Line are located on a built-up, 

gravelly area that is several feet above the ground surface of the adjacent wetlands to the north. Based on 

comparisons with historic maps, it would appear that the project site is constructed on landfill placed in 

the Meadowlands in the 19th and 20th centuries as part of the construction of the existing rail line. 

SOILS 

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Resources Conservation Service’s Web 

Soil Survey indicates that the project site, along with the entire Amtrak rail corridor in the project 

vicinity, is characterized by a single soil complex known as “Urban Land, wet substratum” (“URWETB”) 

(see Figure 4). This soil type is summarized below in Table 1. Immediately to the north of the rail 

corridor, except in those locations that are underwater, soils are mapped as “Westbrook Mucky Peat,” 

(“WectA”) and “Secaucus artifactual fine sandy loam” (“SecA”). As shown in Table 1, the three soil 

types vary in terms of slope, drainage, and landform. However, the rail corridor itself does appear to be 

urban fill surrounded by areas of open water or deposits typical of marshland. 

Table 1

Project Area Soils

Series 

Name

Soil Horizon Depth 

(in inches) Texture Slope (%) Drainage Landform

URWETB

M1: 0 to 6 “Material”

0 to 8 Depth to water table 

= 20 inches M 2: 6 to 20 “Material” Summit

2^Cu: 20 to 79 Coarse sandy loam

SecA

^Au: 0 to 6 Gravelly-artifactual fine 

sandy loam

0 to 3 Moderately well 

drained Backslope

^Cu1: 6 to 17 Very artifactual fine sandy 

loam

^Cu2: 17 to 35 Extremely cobblyartifactual fine sandy loam

^Cu3: 35 to 65 Extremely cobblyartifactual fine sandy loam

WectA Oe: 0 to 19 Mucky peat 0 to 2 Very poorly drained Tidal marsh Cg: 19 to 59 Silt loam

Source: Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Web Soil 

Survey. Available online at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed July, 2015.

SUMMARY OF SOIL BORINGS FROM THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT SITE 

For the purposes of this analysis, several sets of soil boring data from the immediate vicinity of the 

project site were analyzed. All of the boring logs that were analyzed were included as appendices in 

Portal Partners’ 2013 Alternatives Analysis for the Sawtooth Bridges Project (Portal Partners 2013b). Soil 

boring logs described in this section are included as Appendix B.

1

The most recent information was associated with soil borings completed between 2008 and 2012 as part 

of the Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement (PBCE) Project (described in greater detail in Section F: 

“Previous Cultural Resources Investigations in the Vicinity”). These borings were completed across a 

portion of the project site east of the New Jersey Turnpike. The borings appear to have been located 

adjacent to the railroad tracks within or in the immediate vicinity of the existing marshland on both the 

 

1

 The soil boring logs included in Appendix B originally appeared as Appendix K in Portal Partners 2013b. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

8

north and south sides of the existing rail lines. The borings were advanced to great depths and 

encountered bedrock or weathered/decomposing bedrock at depths between 60 and 100 feet below the 

ground surface, with the depth of bedrock increasing to the east. The upper levels of each of the borings 

(between the ground surface and a depth of 40 feet) present a typical profile of fill or organic material at 

the ground surface; then a deposit of alluvium; then a very thick layer of glacial till. The threshold 

between the alluvial deposits and the underlying glacial till—possibly representing the ground surface 

before the rise of sea levels—was identified at varying depths, but was typically observed between 20 and 

30 feet below the ground surface. 

Additional borings were completed in 1972, 1977, and 1979 as part of various improvement projects 

associated with the Bellville Turnpike; the Erie Lackawanna Railroad; and the reconstruction of the 

Newark-Jersey City Turnpike, respectively. One boring was advanced in 1979 east of the Newark-Jersey 

City Turnpike and south of the railroad tracks—to the northeast of the project site—that identified a layer 

of organic silt between 7.5 and 9 feet beneath the ground surface. The 1977 boring program was located 

along the southern side of the rail line west of the New Jersey Turnpike. Three of those borings identified 

a thin (approximately 1 to 2 feet in thickness) layer or of peat and/or silt at varying depths of 8 to 17 feet 

below the ground surface. Finally, one of the borings advanced in 1972 identified a peat layer at 

approximately 7 to 8 feet beneath the ground surface within the location of what was then a proposed new 

track west of the New Jersey Turnpike and north of the Pennsylvania Railroad tracks. 

The combined results of these borings suggest that the pre-inundation ground surface was at variable 

depths across the project site and surrounding vicinity. The presence of peat or organic silts likely 

represents what was the bottom of the marsh prior to landfilling. The alluvial soils identified between 

approximately 10 and 30 feet below the ground surface (the exact depths varied greatly among the 

borings) are likely similar to alluvial sands identified as archaeologically sensitive at other nearby sites 

(see below). 

C. REGIONAL PALEOENVIRONMENT 

Due to the extended glacial period that left the Northeast blanketed in thick ice sheets for thousands of 

years, the area was not inhabited by humans until approximately 12,500 years ago. The retreat of the 

glaciers caused sea levels to rise and New Jersey’s shoreline may have been as much as 85 feet lower and 

80 miles away from its present location when the first Native Americans arrived in the region (NJHPO 

1997). With the increase in temperatures and sea levels and the formation of new waterways fed by 

glacial runoff, a variety of flora and fauna spread throughout the region. At this time, large open conifer 

forests expanded across the northeast, interspersed with open meadows and marshland (NJHPO 1997; 

Cantwell and Wall 2001). A wide variety of animal life could also be found, including large mammals 

such as mammoth, mastodon, caribou, musk ox, moose, as well as smaller mammals such as fox, beaver, 

hare, and many kinds of marine animals (NJHPO 1997; Cantwell and Wall 2001). 

Climate changes continued to reshape the environment of the northeast as time progressed. As the climate 

grew increasingly warmer, jack pine, fir, spruce, and birch trees were replaced with hardwood forests of 

red and white pine, oak, and beech (Ritchie 1980). Furthermore, a decrease in glacial runoff resulted in 

the creation of small bodies of water such as lakes as well as, later on, low-lying marshes and swampy 

areas (NJHPO 1997). By 10,000 years ago, there was “considerable environmental diversity, with a 

mosaic of wetlands, oak stands, and a variety of other plant resources...[making it]...an attractive and 

hospitable quarter for both human and animal populations” (Cantwell and Wall 2001: 53). Warmer 

temperatures forced the herds of large mammals to travel north before eventually dying out. The new 

surroundings attracted other animals such as rabbit, turkey, waterfowl, bear, turtles, and white-tailed deer 

(ibid). The expanded water courses became home to a variety of marine life, and as temperatures warmed, 

fish became increasingly important to the local environment (ibid). 
Chapter 2: Background Research 

9

D. ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES DURING THE HISTORIC PERIOD 

The project site is situated within the area historically known as New Jersey’s “Meadowlands,” an area of 

tidal and freshwater wetlands surrounding the Hackensack and Passaic Rivers. In 1896, the total area 

covered by the Meadowlands was approximately 43 square miles and the wetlands covered the area from 

Hackensack in the north to Elizabeth in the south (Marshall 2004). The project site was situated within a 

region specifically known as the “Hackensack Meadows,” while the southern portion of the Meadowlands 

on the west side of Newark Bay was historically known as the “Newark Meadows” (ibid). Extensive 

landfilling, extraction of natural resources, pollution, environmental factors (e.g., rising sea levels), and 

urban development has transformed the landscape of the Meadowlands, which now cover approximately 

13 square miles (ibid). 

EXPLOITATION OF RESOURCES IN THE HISTORIC PERIOD 

From the prehistoric period through the late 19th century, local inhabitants used the Meadowlands as a 

source of shellfish, fish, foul, and other game, as well as for the various maritime resources that the 

wetlands provided. Newark Bay was famous for oysters, and by the late 19th century had become one of 

the top producers of seed oysters for surrounding areas, including New York City, as the Newark Bay 

oysters were found to have better survival rates after transportation (Ingersoll 1881). Though the seed 

oysters were sent as far as California, by the turn of the century Newark Bay and its surrounding 

waterways, including the Passaic River, were so polluted that shellfish harvested from the area was no 

longer fit for human consumption (Kurlansky 2006).

In addition to oysters, between the 1660s and the 1920s, settlers cultivated and harvested salt hay in the 

area. Salt hay, used for livestock feed and bedding and as a packing material, was the basis of an 

important industry (Teal 1969: 40). Early settlers divided the wetlands into “long, narrow lots, which 

were allocated to the male heads of households” who “were required to excavate small ditches (six feet 

wide and two feet deep) to identify property boundaries” (Marshall 2004: 7). During the last quarter of the 

19th century, the harvesting of fish and game from the Meadowlands was curtailed due to pollution and 

diminishing water flow (ibid). Salt hay production ceased in the early 20th century as salt hay’s role in the 

local economy was reduced (ibid). 

Early settlers in the area in the historic period over-exploited the Atlantic white cedar forests that once 

occupied large tracts of the Meadowlands, including the Hackensack riverfront in Kearny. The wood of 

the trees, which reached up to 60 feet tall, was extremely rot-resistant, and was ideal for boatbuilding, 

road construction, and shingle manufacture (Sloane 1965). Cedar from the Meadowlands area was almost 

exclusively used to create the roofing shingles that were used across the nation in the 18th century (ibid). 

Not only were live trees extensively harvested, but preserved, fallen trees and stumps were “mined” from 

depths of approximately 12 feet below the water level of the wetland areas (ibid: 15). By the late 18th 

century, the cedar forests in the Meadowlands had been all but decimated by the heavy lumbering, and 

while minor resurgences of growth occurred in later years, Atlantic white cedars no longer grow in the 

area (ibid). However, the stumps of the former forests are visible at low tide in certain portions of the 

Meadowlands (Sullivan 1998: 41). 

LANDSCAPE TRANSFORMATION IN THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES 

In the 19th and 20th centuries, approximately 30 square miles of the Meadowlands were transformed to 

dry upland as a direct result of human engineering, including both land reclamation—accomplished either 

through construction of dikes and drains—and land making—involving the deposition of fill material on 

wetlands (Marshall 2004). Nineteenth century projects were mainly limited to land reclamation: drained 

wetlands were located below the high tide line, and were intended for development as farm land rather 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

10 

than residential or industrial use (ibid). The earliest known land reclamation efforts in the Meadowlands 

were carried out by the Swartwout family from the 1820s to the 1840s (ibid). Later, in the 1860s, engineer 

Spencer B. Driggs and developer Samuel Pike employed cutting edge methods, involving water pumps, 

tidal gates, and iron-plated dikes, to reclaim land in the same area (ibid). The iron dikes installed as part 

of these projects are still intact in some locations, and are visible along the Hackensack River (Sullivan 

1998: 51). In the late 19th century, several similar land reclamation projects were spearheaded by Newark 

businessmen, politicians, and developers (Marshall 2004). 

In the 20th century, as population increased and suburbanization resulted in a need for developable land, a 

more costly method of land making became popular, using fill to elevate made land above the water level, 

thus allowing its use for industrial, commercial, or residential purposes. Fill materials were often dredged 

from nearby navigational channels; were excavated as part of development projects in the vicinity; or 

were simply refuse collected from towns and cities in the area (Marshall 2004). Among the major landmakers and developers in the Meadowlands was the New Jersey Terminal Dock and Land Improvement 

Company, which used New York City garbage and excavation debris from the construction of Hudson 

River tunnels to fill over five square miles of wetland between the Hackensack and Passaic rivers (ibid). 

However, industrial waste and sewage were also deposited within the wetlands and illegal dumping 

activities—some possibly undocumented—also occurred. A nearly 94-acre landfill (now inactive) owned 

by the Town of Kearny and the New Jersey Department of Transportation is situated immediately to the 

north of the project site (Portal Partners 2013b). The landfill was not properly closed when it ceased 

operations in 1982, and it has, therefore, contributed to the contamination of the surrounding wetlands 

(ibid). 

In 1968, the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Act was enacted by the New Jersey Legislature, 

intended to prevent illegal dumping (Marshall 2004). A year later, the Hackensack Meadowlands 

Development Commission was founded (ibid). The initial purpose of the group was to oversee planning 

and development, and to regulate garbage disposal. By the 1970s, conservation of the Meadowlands had 

become a more popular cause, and the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission (which 

changed its name to the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission in 2001) focused its efforts on 

remediation and protection of the remaining wetlands (ibid). 

E. CURRENT PROJECT SITE CONDITIONS 

The project site is an active rail corridor that is operated as part of the main line of Amtrak’s Northeast 

Corridor. The ground surface of the APE has been significantly modified over the past century due to 

development associated with transportation, commerce, and industry. The site contains little to no 

vegetation with the exception of wetland grasses. The project site is entirely composed of landfill and is 

surrounded by salt marsh and upland areas that are both developed and undeveloped. The rail corridor is 

developed with numerous railroad lines at various elevations. The tracks are lined with catenary poles, 

and overhead wires and exiting utilities run along and in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Within 

the project site, electric, gas, and telecommunications lines run in the vicinity of the existing railroad 

tracks (Portal Partners 2013b). 

The site includes the existing Sawtooth Bridges, two under-grade bridges that carry two sets of tracks. 

The bridges, which are in deteriorating condition, were constructed in 1907 as part of the expansion of the 

Pennsylvania Railroad through the Meadowlands. The railroad tracks are at grade in the eastern portion of 

the project site and run past wetlands and open water east of the viaducts that carry the New Jersey 

Turnpike over the Passaic River. The bridges have extensive subsurface foundations. As described above, 

west of the turnpike, the former DL&WRR railroad tracks (now part of NJ TRANSIT’s Morris & Essex 

Line) continue on built-up areas several feet above sea level within the northern portion of the project site 

while the NEC tracks to the south (formerly part of the Pennsylvania Railroad) are carried at a higher 
Chapter 2: Background Research 

11 

elevation across the Sawtooth Bridges and an artificial berm. To the south of the berm, outside of the 

project site, are tracks used by PATH trains. 

An existing historic substation—Pennsylvania Railroad Substation No. 4—is located adjacent to the 

project site to the south of the railroad tracks beneath the viaduct that carries the New Jersey Turnpike. 

This structure was constructed in 1910, when the Pennsylvania Railroad expanded its operations through 

the Meadowlands, and is eligible for listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places (Portal 

Partners 2013b). Other small maintenance/storage sheds are present along the railroad tracks within the 

project site and the immediate vicinity. In addition, an Amtrak representative described an allegedly 19thcentury brick tunnel that runs north-south beneath the existing rail line, connecting a tide gate at the 

Passaic River and a concrete culvert north of the project site. This tunnel appears to be part of the 

drainage infrastructure built to allow Frank’s Creek to flow beneath the railroad tracks out to the Passaic 

River. 

F. PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS IN THE 

VICINITY 

Two large environmental review projects have been completed in the last decade that included 

assessments of the archaeological sensitivity of a portion of the Sawtooth Bridges replacement project site 

or its immediate vicinity. These investigations are summarized below. 

PORTAL BRIDGE 

Amtrak and NJ TRANSIT have proposed the PBCE project to enhance the capacity and improve the 

operation of the Portal Bridge, a passenger rail bridge over the Hackensack River to the east of the 

Sawtooth Bridge project site. The existing Portal Bridge is a two-track moveable swing-span bridge 

between the Town of Kearny and the Town of Secaucus in Hudson County, New Jersey and is a critical 

infrastructure element for Amtrak and NJ TRANSIT. The existing Portal Bridge, however, poses 

reliability concerns, capacity constraints, and operational inflexibility. The PCBE Project would meet 

current and future demand, and would enable NJ TRANSIT to provide new services in the future. 

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and NJ TRANSIT prepared a Final Environmental Impact 

Statement (FEIS) and Section 4(f) Evaluation for the project in October 2008 to analyze the potential 

environmental impacts from the proposed project. FRA was the lead federal agency for the FEIS, which 

was prepared in accordance with NEPA. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (USEPA), and the USCG were cooperating agencies for the environmental review. 

The FEIS included a detailed analysis of cultural resources, including archaeological resources, and was 

prepared in accordance with NEPA, the New Jersey Register of Historic Places Act, Section 4(f) of the 

United States Department of Transportation Act, and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 

Act (NHPA) of 1966 (as amended) and associated implementing regulations in 36 C.F.R. 800. The 

archaeological APE for the PBCE project site included a portion of the eastern end of the Sawtooth 

Bridges Replacement project site. 

The archaeological resources analysis determined that the PBCE project site—including that portion that 

overlaps with the Sawtooth Bridges replacement project site—has low archaeological sensitivity overall. 

However, the analysis identified what is known as the Historic Cemeteries of Hudson County, a potter’s

field, located within and adjacent to the PBCE on the eastern side of the Hackensack River. Pursuant to 

Section 106, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) among FRA, NJHPO, Amtrak, and NJ TRANSIT 

was prepared to address the next steps in the event that the project was determined to affect the area that 

was considered to be sensitive for human remains. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

12 

Pursuant to the MOA, as the project design was advanced, NJ TRANSIT and Amtrak conducted a Phase 

1B Archaeological Survey in June 2009. Archaeological field testing consisting of six backhoe trenches 

to determine the presence or absence of human burials or evidence of shaft features associated with the 

historic cemetery. No evidence of burial shafts or human remains was observed during the testing and it 

was determined that the PBCE project would not impact areas that were sensitive for human remains. The 

results of the Phase IB archaeological survey were compiled into a report, which was submitted to 

NJHPO on August 11, 2009. NJHPO issued a letter of concurrence with the findings on September 29, 

2009. This satisfied the project sponsors’ commitments regarding archaeological resources per the 

Section 106 process and no further measures were taken. A draft “Unanticipated Discoveries Plan for 

Archaeological Resources” was submitted to NJHPO and approved on January 23, 2013.

ACCESS TO THE REGION’S CORE (ARC) 

In 2008, NJ TRANSIT, in partnership with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), 

entered preliminary engineering for the Access to the Region’s Core (ARC) project, although this project 

was canceled before it was constructed. The project as proposed would have included a new passenger 

rail terminal adjacent to New York’s Pennsylvania Station and a new two-track tunnel underneath the 

Hudson River that would have connected with the existing NEC. Ancillary elements of ARC would have 

included the construction of a new Kearny Yard west of the Hackensack River, east of the Sawtooth 

Bridge project site. FTA served as lead agency for the environmental review that was conducted prior to 

the cancellation of the project. As part of the environmental review, a Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement (DEIS) for the ARC project was issued in February 2007 and a Supplemental Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) was published in March 2008. 

The DEIS included a detailed analysis of cultural resources, including archaeological resources, and was 

prepared in accordance with NEPA, the New Jersey Register of Historic Places Act, the New York State 

Historic Preservation Act of 1980, Section 4(f) of the United States Department of Transportation Act, 

and Section 106 of the NHPA. As part of the archaeological resources assessment, a Phase 1A 

Archaeological Documentary Study of the ARC project site was prepared by Transit Link Consultants 

(TLC) in 2005. A portion of the ARC project site overlapped with the PBCE project site. Several areas of 

archaeological sensitivity were identified throughout the ARC project site in both the New York and New 

Jersey portions of the APE. The area of sensitivity closest to the Sawtooth Bridges replacement project 

site that was identified at that time was several miles away in the location of the Hudson County potter’s 

field, across the Hackensack River. As described above, Phase 1B archaeological testing in this area 

concluded that human remains were not present. 

STANDARD CHLORINE CHEMICAL SITE: ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING 

In 2012, Langan Engineering and Environmental Services (“Langan”) issued a report summarizing the 

results of an archaeological monitoring investigation at the Standard Chlorine Chemical Site, on the 

western bank of the Hackensack River approximately 2,000 feet northeast of the Sawtooth Bridges 

replacement project site. A Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the site had identified a sand 

layer beneath the depth of marsh deposits at depths ranging between 9 and 17 feet below the ground 

surface (Langan 2012). A total of fourteen samples were taken at a 500-foot interval along the path of a 

proposed slurry wall that was being constructed on the site. Archaeological resources comprising 200 

lithic artifacts (including flakes, debitage, and a possible core) were recovered and identified as an 

archaeological site (filed with NJHPO as Site 28-HD-44). This site is described in greater detail in 

Chapter 3: Prehistoric Period. 
13 

Chapter 3: Prehistoric Period

A. PREHISTORIC CONTEXT 

Archaeologists have divided the time between the arrival of the first humans in northeastern North 

America and the arrival of Europeans more than 11,000 years later into the following contextual periods: 

Paleo-Indian/Early Archaic (11,500-8,000 before present [BP]), Middle Archaic (8,000-6,000 BP), Late 

Archaic (6,000-3,000 BP), Early/Middle Woodland (3,000 BP–1,200), Late Woodland (1,200 BP to AD 

1500) and European Intrusion/Contact Period (AD1500-AD 1700).1 These divisions are based on certain 

changes in environmental conditions, technological advancements, and cultural adaptations, which are 

observable in the archaeological record. Some prehistoric archaeological sites identified in New Jersey 

have spanned several time periods while others are shown to have been occupied for short durations only 

(NJHPO 1997). 

PALEO-INDIAN PERIOD (11,500 TO APPROXIMATELY 10,000 YEARS BP) 

Human populations did not inhabit the northeastern United States (including the area that is modern New 

Jersey) until the glaciers began to retreat more than 14,000 years ago, and possibly arrived as early as 

12,500 years before present (Lenik 1999). The first Native American populations of the region are 

referred to by archaeologists as Paleo-Indians. The Paleo-Indians most likely exploited a wide variety of 

resources provided by their environment. It has been suggested that they did not only actively hunt the 

large mammals that roamed about the region (mammoths, mastodons, etc.), but they also hunted and 

trapped smaller animals and supplemented their diet with fish and gathered plants from the coniferdominated cold weather species that grew in the area (Cantwell and Wall 2001; NJHPO 1997). The 

limited growth range of plant and animal species also limited the occupation range of the Paleo-Indians 

(NJHPO 1997). 

Archaeological evidence suggests that the Paleo-Indians were likely highly mobile hunters and gatherers 

who utilized a distinct style of lithic technology, typified by fluted points often made of high-quality 

chert. They appear to have lived in small groups of fewer than 50 individuals and did not maintain 

permanent campsites (Dincauze 2000). Stone quarries were a common feature of Paleo-Indian sites 

(NJHPO 1997). 

Most of the Paleo-Indian sites were located near what were then water sources before the rise of sea 

levels. As a result of the close proximity of Paleo-Indian sites to the coastline, few of them have been 

preserved in New Jersey and neighboring coastal states, as many sites are now assumed to be submerged 

(Transit Link Consultants [TLC] 2005). Of the few Paleo-Indian sites that have been found in the region, 

many have been found on Staten Island, to the south of the project site. 

 

1

 The date ranges for these prehistoric periods is based on the timeline presented in the “New Jersey Statewide 

Historic Contexts” section of the New Jersey Historic Preservation Plan issued by NJHPO in 1997. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

14 

ARCHAIC PERIOD (APPROXIMATELY 10,000 TO 3,000 YEARS BP) 

The aforementioned environmental transformations that resulted in the submergence of Paleo-Indian 

landscapes also included the continued post-glacial warming trend, the extension of hardwood forests 

from the south, and a decrease in glacial runoff which resulted in the creation of lakes and other small 

bodies of water (Cantwell and Wall 2001). There was a subsequent migration of new animal and plant 

species into the area, while the herds of large mammals traveled north, eventually dying out. The new 

surroundings attracted smaller animals, such as rabbit, turkey, waterfowl, and white-tailed deer (ibid). 

Plants and vegetation more suited to warm weather, such as oak, hickory, beech, and chestnut trees, also 

flourished at this time (NJHPO 1997). This subsequently resulted in an increase in the human population 

and new advancements in subsistence strategies and lithic tool technology. More importantly, the 

geographic range of Archaic peoples expanded to follow resources, leading to the formation of a greater 

number of archaeological sites (ibid). 

In general, archaeologists have shown that Archaic Native American sites are most often located near 

water sources. The abundance of food resources which arose during this period allowed the Archaic 

Native Americans to occupy individual sites on a permanent or semi-permanent basis, unlike their 

nomadic Paleo-Indian predecessors. However, Archaic sites in New York City indicate that the Native 

Americans there continued to hunt and forage on a part-time basis. This was most likely due to the 

incredibly diverse environmental niches that could be found across the region throughout the Archaic 

period and it is possible that the Native Americans residing across the river in New Jersey exhibited 

similar behavioral patterns (Cantwell and Wall 2001, Grumet 1995). 

Perhaps the most important technological development at this time was the advent of fishing technology, 

which occurred during the Middle Archaic in response to an increasing dependence on the area’s marine 

resources. The new technology included stone hooks and net sinkers. In addition, the influx of nut- and 

seed-bearing foliage resulted in the development of stone mortars and pestles as well as stone axes, used 

to process plant material (Cantwell and Wall 2001; NJHPO 1997).

In order to successfully hunt the smaller game animals that had established themselves in the region, 

narrower spear points and knives were manufactured, along with weighted spear throwers. Domestic 

technology was advanced as well, with the development of a wider variety of hide scrapers and, later in 

the period, the origin of bowls made from steatite or soapstone. Tools continued to be crafted in part from 

foreign lithic materials, indicating that there was consistent trade among Archaic Native American groups 

from various regions in North America throughout the Archaic (Cantwell and Wall 2001). 

Although the rise of sea levels was in decline by this time, given the recent rapid development of the area, 

few Early and Middle Archaic sites have been identified in northeastern New Jersey and the New York 

Metropolitan Area (Boesch 1994; TLC 2005). Again, many sites from this time period have been 

identified on the high ground of Staten Island. An Early Archaic site, the Black Creek Site—which is 

listed on the National Register of Historic Places—was identified in the 1990s in the Vernon Valley in 

Sussex County, northwestern New Jersey (Vernon Historical Society n.d.). The site is located on a 40-

acre peninsular landform within a post-glacial lake bed. Many thousands of artifacts ranging from the 

Early Archaic to the Contact and early historic periods were recovered including stone tools, projectile 

points, and pottery sherds (ibid). However, many Late Archaic sites have been found in the region, as by 

that time, sea levels were closer to their current locations (NJHPO 1997). Late Archaic habitation sites are 

often found in areas of low elevation near water courses, and temporary hunting sites are often located 

near sandy areas (Boesch 1994). Archaeological investigations at Late Archaic sites suggest that 

“increased social stratification and complexity” characterized the people of that age (NJHPO 1997: 16). 
Chapter 3: Prehistoric Period 

15 

WOODLAND PERIOD (3,000 BP-AD 1500) 

The Woodland period represents a cultural revolution of sorts for the Northeast. During this time, Native 

Americans began to alter their way of life, focusing on a settled, agricultural lifestyle rather than one of 

nomadic hunting and gathering. Social rituals begin to become visible in the archaeological record at this 

time. There have been many elaborate human and canine burial sites identified from this period. It was at 

this time that pottery began to be produced, which resulted in dramatic alterations to the ways of life of 

native populations as food storage allowed for more permanent occupation sites (NJHPO 1997).

In general, there was a greater emphasis placed on composite tools during the Woodland period. While 

stone scrapers, knives, and hammerstones were still in use, there was an increased use of bone, shell, and 

wood in tool making. Furthermore, the development of bows and arrows revolutionized hunting practices. 

Fishing continued to be important to the local economy and wooden boats and bone hooks were often 

utilized (Historical Perspectives, Inc. 2005). Many tools from this period were made from imported 

materials, indicating that the trade networks established earlier were still being maintained with groups 

from neighboring areas, including Staten Island, Long Island, the Susquehanna Valley, and what is now 

upstate New York (Cantwell and Wall 2001; NJHPO 1997). 

Pottery was introduced into Native American society early in the Woodland period, and by the time of 

European contact in the 1500s, well-crafted and elaborately decorated pottery was being manufactured. 

The subdivision of the Woodland period into Early, Middle, and Late sections is largely dependent on the 

style of pottery which was produced at that time. Woodland pottery had simple beginnings; the first 

examples were coil pots with pointed bases, which were made with grit temper. These were replaced 

during the Middle Woodland period by shell-tempered vessels bearing a variety of stamped and imprinted 

decorations (Louis Berger Group [LBG] 2004). 

Woodland-era sites across North America indicate that there was an overall shift toward full-time 

agriculture and permanently settled villages. There was, however, some farming of maize, beans, squash, 

and tobacco. The development of pottery, increasingly complex burial sites, and the presence of 

domesticated dogs are all consistent with sedentary societies, which have a close association with a 

particular territory or piece of land. 

Two possible Woodland-period sites were identified within several miles of the archaeological APE. 

These were identified by Dr. William L. Pyle in 1936, and have been recorded in the New Jersey State 

Museum site files as site numbers 26-HD-7 and 26-HD-8 respectively. The sites were located in Jersey 

City. Site 26-HD-7 was described as being at the foot of the lake and north of the knoll in Lincoln Park, 

Jersey City. It was identified as a village or camp site located near a former spring. Pyle collected over 50 

artifacts from the site, including projectile points, axes, pipes, and knives, with a date range estimated at 

300 to 3,000 years BP. Site 26-HD-8 was located at the foot of Williams, Boyd, Virginia, and Ege 

Avenues, south of Lincoln Park, in Jersey City, near the Hackensack River. Little information was 

recorded regarding this site. 

EUROPEAN INTRUSION/CONTACT PERIOD (AD 1500-1700) 

The Woodland period ended with the arrival of the first Europeans in the early 1500s. Because of the 

short duration of the Contact Period, it can be difficult to differentiate between sites dating to the later 

portion of the Woodland and the Contact Period (NJHPO 1997). At that time, a division of the Delaware 

Indians known as the Lenni Lenape resided in northern New Jersey (ibid). A group of Munsee known as 

the Hackensack Indians also resided in the vicinity of the project site (Grumet 1981). The Hackensack 

have been described as “a numerous as well as a war-like group” whose territory extended as far inland as 

the Passaic River (Bolton 1975: 58). The group was friendly with their neighbors, who included the 

Raritan to the southeast and the Tappan to the north. It is possible that they shared their lands as far south 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

16 

as Staten Island with the latter group (ibid). Giovanni de Verrazano was the first European to view New 

York in 1524. However, expeditions by Lord de la Warre in 1608 and Henry Hudson in 1609 marked the 

true beginning of European occupation in the area (NJHPO 1997). 

Shortly after Hudson’s men explored Staten Island and northern New Jersey, a skirmish ensued with the 

local Indians, resulting in the death of one of Hudson’s crewmen (Lenik 1999). Because of this early 

incident, the Native Americans in the region were initially extremely wary of Europeans. The first attempt 

at a permanent settlement in the area was known as “Pavonia,” located on the neck of land east of Newark 

Bay, in the vicinity of the modern towns of Jersey City and Bayonne; southeast of the project site. The 

land was granted in 1629 by the Dutch West India Company (WIC) to Michael Pauw (Paauw) (Stokes 

1967). After five years of hostile encounters with the local Native Americans, Pauw sold the land back to 

the WIC for 26,000 guilders (ibid). Although several Dutch farmers lived in the area in the 1630s and 

1640s, as seen on the Manatus Map of 1639, a successful permanent settlement was not established until 

1660, when Bergen Village, near today’s Jersey City, was founded (Lenik 1999). 

At the start of the Contact Period, Native Americans maintained the village sites they had established near 

water sources. As their trade with European settlers intensified, they became increasingly sedentary and 

the way of life once maintained by the Native Americans was thoroughly and rapidly altered. European 

guns, cloth, kettles, glass beads, and alcohol soon became incorporated into the Native American 

economy. While at first the Natives traded furs and pelts in exchange for European goods, maize (corn) 

quickly became an important commodity. Most Lenape groups grew corn at the sites of their permanent 

habitation sites as well as at seasonal campsites, and soon Europeans began to rely on Native American 

agriculture (Becker 1999). Soon, maize began to “stabilize” the Native American economy and was a 

major factor in the increased sedentary behavior of local Indian tribes (ibid: 45). 

Once the European settlers became more self-sufficient, maize was no longer an important commodity 

and the newly formed Native American economy suffered (Lenik 1999). In addition, the Native 

Americans suffered from the side-effects of European colonization: disease, alcoholism, and warfare. 

Fierce wars soon broke out between the Dutch and the Indians. This was most intense during the early 

1640s when Dutch Director-General William Kieft ordered many ferocious and unprovoked attacks on 

the Native population. One of the more vicious attacks at this time occurred in 1643, when after a Dutch 

man was murdered by a Native American at the Pavonia settlement, the Dutch slaughtered a village of 

Native American refugees, including many Hackensack, in the middle of the night (Grumet 1981). While 

Kieft’s war with the Indians continued in other parts of New Amsterdam, the Hackensack signed peace 

treaties in both 1643 and 1645 (ibid). The warfare was somewhat abated when Kieft was replaced by 

Peter Stuyvesant, who brought some stability to the area (Burrows and Wallace 1999). However, the 

Native Americans were no match for the growing numbers of armed European settlers. With their 

populations quickly decreasing and the European demand for land increasing, the natives began to sell off 

their land in greater quantities. 

As land in the New York City region was sold to the Europeans, many displaced Native Americans 

joined the Hackensack in northern New Jersey. By 1700, the Hackensack and Tappan tribes had each 

been forced to retreat to the “upper reaches of the Hackensack and Passaic Rivers” until they had 

“virtually merged” (Grumet 1981: 13). They occupied the highland areas of northern New Jersey until the 

mid-18th century, at which time they were gradually forced further and further west (Grumet 1981: 13).

The area now occupied by the ‘West Hudson’ towns of Kearny and Harrison, was called Meghgecticock

by the Hackensack Indians and was named “New Barbadoes Neck” after Chief Tantaqua deeded much of 

the area to Captain William Sanford of Barbados in 1668 (Krasner 2000). Snake Hill, to the east of the 

Hackensack River, was reportedly held sacred by the Hackensack Indians that inhabited the area in the 

Colonial period (Van Winkle 1924). 
Chapter 3: Prehistoric Period 

17 

Multiple Contact-period archaeological sites have been identified in the region. Alanson Skinner and Max 

Schrabisch, in their 1913 report of archaeological sites in New Jersey, recorded 11 Native American fish 

weirs (traps) in the Passaic River (Lutins and DeCondo 1999). Of these 11 weirs, the Fair Lawn/Paterson 

Fish Weir is still extant. Lutins and DeCondo, who investigated the structure in 1999, described it as a Vshaped stone wall constructed of boulders and river cobbles, spanning the entire width of the Passaic 

River (roughly 260 feet) north of the Fair Lawn Avenue Bridge near the city of Paterson (ibid). Contact 

Period sites associated with Native American villages can include the remnants of dwellings; trash 

middens; storage pits; hearths; and/or burials (NJHPO 1997). 

B. PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED NATIVE AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL 

SITES

As described in NJHPO’s 1997 State Historic Preservation Plan, prehistoric archaeological sites in New 

Jersey can include “large and small settlements, cemetery and other burial sites, trails, stone quarries, fish 

weirs, shell middens, and a wide variety of special purpose locations where specific foods and non-food 

resources were collected and/or processed” (NJHPO 1997: 15). Site file searches at NJHPO and NJSM 

indicate that one prehistoric archaeological site has been identified within one mile of of the project site 

(see Table 2). 

Table 2

Previously Identified Prehistoric Archaeological Sites

NJSM Site Number

Approximate 

Distance from 

Project Site Time Period Site Type and Information

28-HD-44 0.38 miles

(2,000 feet) Prehistoric Deeply buried lithic tools and debitage collected through monitoring/sampling.

Source: NJSM site files; Langan 2012.

As described in the previous chapter, NJSM site 28-HD-44 was identified approximately 2,000 feet east 

of the project site on the western shore of the Hackensack River and south of the existing Amtrak tracks 

(Langan 2012). A Phase 1A of the site had determined that the site had low sensitivity for sites dating to 

the Woodland—when the area would have been inundated marsh—and low to moderate sensitivity at 

greater depths for earlier periods of occupation (ibid). A geomorphological assessment of the site 

concluded that the site “was a depositional setting (a combined floodplain of the Passaic and Hackensack 

Rivers) during a period in the Early to Middle Holocene, when much of the Hackensack River valley was 

subject to erosion or was a non-depositional setting” (ibid: 6). The general stratigraphy of the site 

included 6 to 10 feet of fill; 2 to 7 feet of marsh deposits; 3 to 8 feet of alluvial soils; and finally, glacial 

lake bed sediments. As described in Chapter 2: Background Research, soil borings indicate that a 

similar soil profile is present within the Sawtooth Bridges replacement project site. 

The alluvial soils, located between 9 and 17 feet beneath the ground surface, were considered to be the 

most likely to contain archaeological resources. The “broad sandy element” was thought to be “somewhat 

anomalous in the Meadowlands setting...[suggesting] that as this part of the Hackensack River valley was 

affected by Late Holocene sea level rise and marsh formation, the area between the Passaic and 

Hackensack River channels formed a topographic high where inundation would have been delayed” 

(Langan 2012: 44). Historic maps (e.g., the 1844-1845 Hassler map, see Figure 3) do indeed suggest that 

a central portion of the landform existed between the two rivers. 

As described previously, the archaeological site now known as 28-HD-44 was identified in 2011 during 

archaeological monitoring completed by Langan Engineering and Environmental Services during the 

construction of a slurry wall. In total, eight of the 21 samples collected during the investigation included 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

18 

evidence of prehistoric occupation, including 146 pieces of debitage and a possible depleted core (Audin 

and Stiteler 2011). The majority of the finds were from the eastern portion of the site, in close proximity 

to the Hackensack River (ibid). Additional monitoring was recommended in this area, particularly for 

those areas where excavation would extend to a depth greater than 15 feet below the marsh mat surface 

near the Hackensack River (ibid). 
19 

Chapter 4: The Historic Period 

A. INTRODUCTION 

The historic period in New Jersey began in the 16th and 17th centuries when the first European explorers 

arrived in the region and European settlements began. The 1997 State Historic Preservation Plan (NJHPO 

1997: 18) divides New Jersey’s historic period into six general historical contexts: Initial colonial 

settlement (between 1630 and 1775); Early industrialization, urbanization, and agricultural development 

(1775 to 1860); Suburban development (1860 to 1775); Immigration and agricultural, industrial, 

commercial, and urban expansion (1850 to 1920); Metropolitan New Jersey (1910 to 1945); and Modern 

New Jersey (1945 to the present). The following chapter provides general historic contexts for the 

Meadlowlands region of New Jersey; the Town of Kearny; and the general industrial and transportation 

history of the area. The chapter also includes a summary of the development of the project site during the 

historic period with other background information as necessary to clarify the project site’s place within 

broader historical contextual themes that have been established for New Jersey. 

B. HISTORICAL CONTEXT FOR THE PROJECT SITE 

Among the earliest European explorers to land in New Jersey was Lord de la Warre, who arrived in 1608 

and for whom the Delaware River was named (NJHPO 1997). Dutch settlers soon followed, establishing 

communities first in Hudson and Bergen Counties, closer to the heart of the main settlement of New 

Netherland, then located on Manhattan (ibid). As the project site was composed of marshland, little 

development occurred in the area during America’s colonial occupation. 

THE EARLY HISTORY OF HARRISON AND KEARNY 

In 1719, copper was discovered in the vicinity of what is now Kearny, New Jersey in 1719, which 

prompted settlement and construction of new roads (Whitehead 1901; Van Winkle 1924). Initial 

settlement occurred on a “riser” of land located to the north and west of the project site and along the high 

ground on the western side of the Passaic River (Van Winkle 1924: 364). A mine operated by Arent 

Schuyler (1662-1730), a merchant of Dutch extraction, became one of the first successful industries in the 

area and was in operation into the late 19th century (Whitehead 1901; Van Winkle 1924). The copper 

mine is one of the only locations specifically named on a 1777 coastal survey of New Jersey produced by 

William Faden. The beginnings of industry and settlement in the area resulted in a need for roads. The 

Newark Plank Road, which ran east-west across the lower Kearny Meadowlands north of the project site, 

was built in 1765 (Whitehead 1901). The road appears on early historic maps (such as the 1844 Smith 

map and the 1844-1845 Hassler Coastal Survey) to the north of the project site. Whereas at first ferries 

were located at either end of the road to carry travelers over the adjacent rivers, bridges were soon 

constructed to allow the road to continue across the water to the mainland (Van Winkle 1924). 

As mentioned in Chapter 3: Prehistoric Period, the portion of the Meadowlands in which the project 

site is situated was named “New Barbadoes Neck” in honor of Captain William Sanford of Barbados, 

who purchased the land from the local Native Americans in 1668 (Whitehead 1901). An 1812 coastal 

survey by William Watson identifies the project site by this name and also indicates that by that time, the 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

20 

point of land near the confluence of the Hackensack and Passaic Rivers was known as “Sanford’s Point.” 

In 1825, “New Barbados Neck” was officially renamed “Lodi” in commemoration of Napoleon’s victory 

in that northern Italian town in 1796 and a town in New Jersey northwest of the project site still bears this 

name (Scott 1922). An 1845 map of New Jersey produced by John T. Hammond identifies the project site 

by this name, although in 1840, the name was changed again, to Harrison, in honor of President William 

Henry Harrison (ibid). In 1867, the town of Kearny separated from the town of Harrison; it was named 

after General Philip Kearny, a commander in the Mexican and Civil wars (Krasner 2000; Van Winkle 

1924). Kearny, who was killed at Chantilly during the Civil War, had established an elaborate estate in 

the area, which he called Belle Grove, between 1853 and 1856 (Krasner 2000). 

Throughout the 18th and much of the 19th centuries, Kearny remained largely undeveloped, with the 

exception of the roads and railroads that traversed it. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, “the 

meadows, a marsh land, were deemed worthless and...members of the Council suggested abandoning the 

entire tract as a common nuisance which cost the township more money to police and guard than it was 

worth” (Van Winkle 1924: 369). Until that time, “the entire meadow tract was as nature made it, the only 

exception being the two or three boat houses which had sprung up adjacent to the railroad bridges 

crossing the Hackensack river” (ibid: 370). 

In addition, a wealth of anecdotal accounts in newspapers and local histories suggests that the 

Meadowlands in Kearny were the site of river pirate camps from the colonial period through the early 

19th century. River pirates harassed the ships and docks of New York City and New Jersey, stealing boats 

and ships’ cargos and engaging in smuggling operations (Van Winkle 1924). The river pirates’ best 

known camps included the Fourth Ward of Manhattan, the Meadowlands near Bayonne, and the cedar 

swamps adjacent to Snake Hill in Kearny (ibid). One of the larger camps was allegedly northeast of the 

project site, “secreted in the tract of the Kearny meadows somewhere opposite Snake Hill which they 

reached by means of a tidal creek or stream” (ibid: 369). This inlet was likely to the northeast of the 

project site along the Hackensack River. 

THE CONSTRUCTION OF RAILROADS AND RISE OF INDUSTRY IN THE 19TH CENTURY 

Despite the undeveloped nature of the low-lying marshes, Kearny’s location between the burgeoning 

cities of Newark and Jersey City increasingly made the township a convenient location for both industrial 

and commercial use as well as for residential communities. The Hackensack and Passaic rivers provided 

transportation opportunities to local residents and businesses, as did the multiple turnpikes, plank roads, 

and railroads that traversed the area. The industrial transformation of the Kearny Meadows began in 

earnest in the early 20th century (Van Winkle 1924). As a result of its location between the major cities of 

New York and Philadelphia and between New England and the southern states, transportation has been a 

major component of New Jersey’s history since the colonial period. New Jersey also supplied products 

and material to nearby cities—including grain, lumber, meat, and other regional exports—and New 

Jersey’s Atlantic coast. The state’s many navigable rivers, and its low-lying land corridors made it 

possible for myriad transportation networks to develop, most of which were oriented in a northeastsouthwest direction connecting New York City and Philadelphia. 

One of the earliest public roads in New Jersey, authorized by the State Legislature in 1765, ran from 

Newark across the Meadowlands (north of the project site) to Paulus Hook (now a section of Jersey City) 

where travelers could get to Manhattan by ferry (Whitehead 1901). In 1790, the Legislature appointed 

five commissioners to oversee the construction and maintenance of toll bridges across the Hackensack 

and Passaic rivers. Shareholders or ‘proprietors’ quickly formed a joint-stock company, and claimed a 

monopoly on building bridges near the mouths of the two rivers. The roadway was a success, multiple 

stage coach lines were established, and Newark’s population grew swiftly, due to the ease of travel to 

New York City (Lane 1939: 125). Additional turnpikes were constructed across New Jersey in the early 
Chapter 4: The Historic Period 

21 

19th century and the roads were generally established by municipalities in order to serve local or regional 

transportation and trade needs. Most turnpikes in New Jersey successfully provided returns to investors, 

particularly where monopolies existed; however, the success of the turnpikes waned with the competition 

of canals. The Morris Canal, which connected the upper Delaware with Newark and Jersey City to the 

south of the project site, was constructed in 1831. Canals quickly superseded roadways as routes for the 

transport of goods, particularly anthracite coal from Pennsylvania (Lane 1939: 162). 

As the 19th century continued, railroads came to dominate transportation and New Jersey was at the 

forefront of railroad construction in the United States. In 1832, the New Jersey Railroad and 

Transportation Company (NJRR) was incorporated to construct a direct rail line between Trenton, New 

Jersey and New York City via a terminal and ferry located in Jersey City (Van Winkle 1924). The NJRR 

was the third rail company to be established in the state and the construction of the line across the 

marshland was one of the more complicated aspects of its construction (Treese 2006). At that time, 

railroad lines constructed within the meadows between the Passaic and Hackensack Rivers were 

constructed on “embankments [built] by driving piles surprisingly deep into the muck before reaching 

bedrock and then hauling in tons of fill” (ibid: 110). 

In a letter to stockholders written in 1841, the NJRR noted that cost overruns during the construction of 

the rail line were in part due to the “embankments across the meadows which settled at several placed for 

a considerable distance to the depth of from seventy to eighty feet” (NJRR 1841). A feature published in 

Scientific American in 1868 depicts the extensive manpower that was required to construct the dikes and 

dams that allowed for land to be reclaimed within the meadows and to allow for the railroad lines to be 

constructed and to allow for the land to be “productive of good rather than evil” (Scientific American

1868: 65). 

The NJRR’s success was enhanced when it leased the ferry operations that connected it to major cities in 

1841 and subsequently purchased the ferries twelve years later (Treese 2006). The NJRR was primarily a 

passenger line, and earned a reputation for comfort and convenience (Lane 1939: 363). The Morris & 

Essex Railroad was chartered in 1835 to connect the New Jersey cities of Morristown and Newark. In 

1836, the NJRR agreed to carry Morris & Essex traffic between Newark and Jersey City. In 1868, the 

Delaware, Lackawanna, and Western Railroad leased the Morris & Essex Railroad, including all of its 

branches. With the establishment of the rail lines, stage coach companies between New York and 

Philadelphia ceased to operate (Lane 1939: 381). The New Jersey Railroad Company and the 

conglomerate Camden and Amboy Railroad were consolidated as the United Canal and Railroad 

Companies of New Jersey in 1867. In 1871, the Pennsylvania Railroad leased the consolidated company, 

and thus acquired a continuous route from New York to Philadelphia (Treese 2006).

Following the development of the first railroads through the area in the 1860s and 1870s, Kearny was 

transformed from undeveloped meadow to a center of industry. Numerous large-scale manufacturing 

facilities were established in the area. Several of the largest Kearny mills had British proprietors, who 

recruited workers from England and Scotland. In contrast, workers for the industries of Arlington were 

primarily Swedes and Belgians, and the majority of those in the town of Harrison (west of Kearny) were 

Irish (Van Winkle 1924: 371). 

During the last quarter of the 19th century, the Kearny Meadowlands experienced rapid industrial 

development due in part to new transportation routes and advances in land-making technology. Multiple 

textile and floor-covering mills were established in Kearny during the 1880s and 1890s, and the town’s 

population exploded during this period, largely with immigrants from England and Scotland. The 

population continued to increase in the early 20th century, rising from 18,659 to 26,724 between 1910 

and 1920 (Van Winkle 1924: 361). Kearny’s downtown area was located east of Midland Avenue, to the 

west of the project site. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

22 

EXPANSION AND MODERNIZATION OF THE RAILROAD IN THE 20TH CENTURY 

The Pennsylvania Railroad became one of the most powerful rail lines in the northeastern United States at 

the turn of the 20th century. During that time, the rail line expanded its facilities, culminating with the 

construction of tunnels beneath the Hudson River—eliminating the need for ferries for the first time—and 

Pennsylvania Station in Manhattan in 1910 (Jonnes 2007). The construction of the Hudson River tunnels 

eliminated the need for the ferry crossing at Jersey City and as a result, a new, “double” track was 

constructed across the Meadowlands to the northeast towards Weehawken, where the tunnels connected 

to New York’s Pennsylvania Station (Couper 1912). The double tracks crossed the meadows and wound 

around Snake Hill on an elevated embankment and across numerous bridges, including the Sawtooth 

Bridges (ibid). The centerpiece of the “Meadows Division” of the rail line was the Manhattan Transfer, a 

new interchange yard located in the meadows to the west of the project site (American Society of Civil 

Engineers 1910). Substation Number 4 was also constructed at this time as part of the expansion of the 

Pennsylvania Railroad. 

While the engineers who designed the bridge had anticipated problems as a result of settling, as had 

occurred with the original construction of the NJRR, the expanded Pennsylvania Railroad tracks 

experienced fewer problems associated with the meadows (Couper 1912). Some of the fill material was 

generated by cellar excavation and some was from the tunnel excavations and was brought up the 

Hackensack and Passaic Rivers by scow (ibid). The landscape was at that time described as follows: 

The Meadows section of the railroad is a 5-mile continuous stretch of semi-tidal meadow 

swampland...The ground surface is covered with a heavy growth of reeds and the top 

stratum is a peaty bog from 8 to 15 feet deep, underlaid [sic] with varying strata of clay, 

fine sand, and mixed sand and clay for very considerable depths (American Society of 

Civil Engineers 1910: 351-352). 

The unpredictable and highly variable subsurface conditions made it difficult to determine how deep 

foundations needed to be (American Society of Civil Engineers 1910). During the construction of a 

telegraph line along the southern side of the tracks, concrete pole foundations extended anywhere 

between 30 and 80 feet beneath the ground surface (ibid). The Meadows branch of the Pennsylvania 

Railroad is now part of Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor and runs through the project site in Kearny. 

The Pennsylvania Railroad transformed train travel in the early 20th century, and by the mid-20th 

century, New Jersey’s transportation was again transformed by the advent of highways and motor vehicle 

traffic. In the 1930s, discussions began in support of constructing a major highway from Boston to 

Washington. Momentum dissipated with the advent of the Great Depression; however, then-New Jersey 

Governor Alfred E. Driscoll reintroduced the idea in the mid-1940s. In 1948, the State Legislature 

enacted the New Jersey Turnpike Authority Act, which created the New Jersey Turnpike Authority to 

oversee the planning, construction, and maintenance of the highway (Plant 2007). The planning and 

construction of the roadway were put on an accelerated timeline and when it was completed in 1952, it 

was “considered the cutting edge of highway construction” (ibid: 112). 

C. THE DEVELOPMENT HISTORY OF THE PROJECT SITE 

As described above, the project site and surrounding area remained undeveloped wetlands until the early 

19th century. One of the earliest maps of the area is Hassler’s ca. 1844-1845 coastal survey (see Figure

3). The only development shown in the vicinity of the project site on that map are the tracks of the NJRR, 

which as described above, was incorporated in 1832. The tracks crossed east-west through the 

Meadowlands in a nearly straight line. As such, the tracks only entered the western portion of the project 

site. The map depicts two small structures to the south of the tracks, in the approximate location of 

existing Substation Number 4. While the railroad tracks are depicted on the map as being surrounded by 
Chapter 4: The Historic Period 

23 

marsh, a large area between the Hackensack and Passaic Rivers on either side of the tracks is depicted as 

filled and divided into large lots or fields. The tracks and surrounding marshland are also depicted on 

Smith’s 1844 and 1847 map of the region, both of which suggest the presence of a structure to the south 

of the tracks similar to Hassler’s 1844-1845 map. 

AGRICULTURAL CULTIVATION WITHIN THE MEADOWS 

Sidney’s 1849 map depicting the area reflects the growth that had occurred in the area by the mid-19th 

century. That map indicates that the project site continued to be inundated wetland, however it also 

reflects the construction of homes and business along the Newark Plank Road to the north. A second road 

is depicted on that map extending south from the plank road to the railroad tracks. Two structures are 

depicted in the vicinity of the project site along that road. The first structure was situated immediately 

north of the railroad tracks on the eastern side of the road and the map does not identify its use or owner. 

The second structure was located on the east side of the road less than a quarter of a mile north of the 

tracks and its owner is identified as “[Gustine] & Lathrop.” 

No individual with the last name “Lathorp” was recorded as a resident of Hudson County in the 1850 

Federal Census, although Samuel J. Gustin, a 34-year-old nurseryman, was recorded as a resident of the 

North Ward of Newark in Essex County that year. Samuel J. Gustin ran an establishment known as the 

“Newark Nursery” or “Nurseries,” a fruit and tree farm that may have been located on or near the project 

site, as described below (Barry 1854; New Jersey State Legislature 1857). In 1857, Gustin was appointed 

“Nurseryman and Superintendent of Planting” for what was then the newly founded Central Park in 

Manhattan (New York Times 1857). 

Walling’s 1860 map of the area only depicts one structure in the vicinity of the project site (see Figure 5). 

That structure was the former Lathorp building which by 1860 had become the property of “G. 

Thorburn.” No other developments are shown in the vicinity of the project site on the 1860 map with the 

exception of the tracks of the “New Jersey RR.” The railroad tracks and the structure owned by Thorburn 

are both shown as located within and completely surrounded by marshland. Again, it therefore does not 

appear likely that this was a residential dwelling and was likely still in use for agricultural purposes as it 

had been when Samuel J. Gustin was identified as an owner. By 1860, census records indicate that Gustin 

had moved to Pennsylvania, although historic directories for Newark published in 1861 and 1862 

continue to list him as a nurseryman operating a business along the “Causeway.” However, he appears to 

have remained invested in the Newark Nursery through that time. 

The individual identified as the owner on the Walling map may be Grant Thorburn, a horticulturalist and 

seed producer, who moved from New York to New Jersey in the early 19th century (Thorburn 1853). 

Thorburn is thought to have issued the first seed catalog in the nation in 1822 and been the first to massproduce seeds (Robertson 2011). In 1829, Grant Thorburn wrote of the “abundance” of liverwort “on the 

banks of the Hackensack Rivers in New Jersey...the only herb that ever God Almighty made which has 

no medical properties” (ibid: 221). Thorburn also wrote of how he came to own property in the area in the 

first decades of the 19th century and how it led him to bankruptcy, and eventually jail: 

A few years previous, a gardener from England, by the name of Thornly, purchased 

about seven acres of land near Newark Bridge, which he improved as a kitchen-garden, 

and for raising a few seed; but failing of success, and getting in debt, he absconded. He 

owed me a hundred dollars at the time; so, when he got to Philadelphia he executed a 

deed, whereby he constituted me owner of the soil, the first intimation of which was my 

receiving said deed per mail. As there was a considerable crop of seeds on the ground at 

the time, I resolved to gather the seeds as part payment; and as there was a mortgage for 

two hundred dollars on the premises, to let the land go to whomsoever had the best claim. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

24 

The seeds were gathered, and the crop hardly paid the men’s wages; but still I was 

persuaded to pay the mortgage and keep the place, as my well-intending friends all said 

it would do wonders under the management of an active man. It did wonders with a 

witness; for, after striving and toiling by sunlight and moonlight, in wet weather and dry 

weather, I found, at the end of five years, I had spent the whole earnings of my life and 

was several thousands worse than nothing (Thorburn 1853: 69-70). 

Thorburn later found success as a seed merchant in New York City and resided in Queens and 

Connecticut after 1854, and therefore, was not living in New Jersey at the time that the 1860 Walling map 

was produced (Wilson and Fiske 1889). The only resident of New Jersey identified in the 1860 census 

with a similar name was Grant’s son, George C. Thorburn. Thorburn was a resident of Newark and also a 

well-known horticulturalist and botanist (Thorburn 1843; Thomas 1877). George C. Thorburn died in 

1860, the year the map was published, after falling into an open church vault (New York Observer and 

Chronicle 1860). Around the time of his death, he was preparing to take control of the management of 

George Washington’s estate at Mount Vernon (ibid). A historic directory published in 1863 indicates that 

Thorburn’s widow, Virginia, resided at 9 State Street in Newark, in close proximity to the Passaic River. 

Regardless of which Thorburn may have owned the property, it was likely used for agricultural purposes 

only. In 1854, a man named J.M. Thorburn advertised that the Newark Nursery included “125 acres in the 

highest state of cultivation” (Thorburn 1854. 327). An 1860 advertisement in The Working Farmer was 

posted by Samuel C. Pitman, who had recently purchased the Newark Nurseries, which advertised “fruit 

and ornamental trees of every variety” in East Newark along the line of the New Jersey Railroad. The 

advertisement specified that orders could be placed at Thorburn’s store on John Street in Manhattan. A 

second advertisement placed in The Horticulturalist and Journal of Rural Art and Rural Taste in 1860 

announced that “the Newark Nursery...disposed of some 200 acres of their grounds to a Company, for a 

permanent ‘fair ground’” and were therefore “obliged to remove the Trees from those grounds” (The 

Horticulturalist... 1860: p. 10). The advertisement indicated that orders should be placed with “Gustin & 

Pitman, Nurseryman, Newark, or to Messers. J.M. Thorburn & Co., 15 John Street, New York” (ibid). It 

therefore appears that both Gustin and Thorburn retained a stake in the nursery through at least 1860, 

when it appears to have been sold. 

Neither Sidney’s 1849 map nor Walling’s 1860 map identifies the use of the structure associated with 

Gustin and Thorburn. Given its marshy surroundings, the property was most likely associated with the 

farm/nursery uses and was not used as a residence. The exact location of the nursery is not identified on 

historic maps. It is unclear if the marsh could have supported the nursery while inundated, and it is 

possible the large upland area shown on maps to the east of the project site may have been the actual 

location of the tree farm. It is also possible that given the landfilling that altered the landscape to allow the 

construction of the rail line to the south caused the area to the north to be less inundated and therefore 

usable farmland. If the nursery was located within the marsh area, it would be expected that drains and 

ditches were excavated in the area to drain the farmland and allow for the planting of trees and other 

vegetation. 

RAILROAD EXPANSION 

An 1866 coastal chart is the first to depict the tracks of the DL&WRR Railroad to the north of the New 

Jersey Railroad tracks. The Morris and Essex Railroad had been chartered in 1835 and was later absorbed 

into the DL&WRR (Hoyt 1918). The Morris and Essex line had been linked to the NJRR on the eastern 

shore of the Passaic River—but west of the project site—in 1855 (Couper 1912). Circa 1862-1863, the 

Morris and Essex line was expanded to include a new line linking the towns of Newark and Hoboken 

through the Meadowlands, and allowing the line to connect to New York City along an uninterrupted path 
Chapter 4: The Historic Period 

25 

(Hoyt 1918; Couper 1912). In 1868, the line was leased by the DL&WRR (Couper 1912). In the vicinity 

of the project site, the Morris and Essex tracks ran parallel to and north of the tracks of the NJRR. 

A coastal survey of the area created by F.H. Gerdes between 1871 and 1874 depicts the project site in 

greater detail, though it shows neither the road that led south from the Newark Plank Road nor the former 

building owned by Thorburn. The map is also among the first to reflect the construction of the Morris & 

Essex Rail line within the project site north of the NJRR tracks. With the exception of the railroad tracks, 

the project site is depicted as entirely undeveloped marshland. To the south of the railroad tracks, in the 

vicinity of structures seen on maps from the 1840s, was a small building situated on what may have been 

a small wharf built at the edge of the Passaic River. A small road led from this building to the northwest, 

possibly in the vicinity of the road seen on the 1849 and 1860 maps, but it is shown as terminating a short 

distance north of the rail line. Finally, the map depicts Frank’s Creek running beneath both the Morris & 

Essex and New Jersey Railroad tracks, but the map is not clear as to whether the creek was running 

through a culvert or if the tracks passed over the creek via small bridges. Finally, the name “Thorburg” is 

shown on the map to the southeast of the project site, near the mouth of a creek on the northern shore of 

the Passaic River, possibly referencing the Thorburn property identified on previous maps. 

Coastal charts published by the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey in 1889, 1906, 1912, and 1914 

and USGS maps issued in 1891, 1898 (see Figure 6), 1900, and 1905 do not depict any buildings in or in 

the immediate vicinity of the project site, although some of these maps do reflect the expansion of the 

Pennsylvania Railroad. The 1891 Bien and Vermule topographical atlas, which does not depict building 

footprints, identifies the area immediately surrounding the project site to the north of the railroad tracks as 

fresh marsh. The marshland to the south of the railroad near the western half of the project site, adjacent 

to the Passaic River, and the areas to the north of the Newark Turnpike are depicted on the 1891 map as 

tidal marshland. It therefore appears that the project site remained relatively undisturbed at the turn of the 

20th century while dramatic landscape modifications and industrial development were transforming the 

Meadowlands all around the site. 

One of the first accurate real estate atlases of the area was published by G. Hopkins in 1909. Once again, 

no structures are depicted in the vicinity of the project site with the exception of the rail corridors of the 

“Pennsylvania Tunnel and Terminal Rail Road Company,” including the Meadows Division that was 

under construction at the time, and the DL&WRR Railroad. The land to the north of the rail corridors and 

east of Frank’s Creek is identified on the map as belonging to the “Newark Meadows Improvement 

Company.” No structures or developments other than the railroad and Pennsylvania Railroad Substation 

No. 4 are depicted in the vicinity of the project site on that map. 

THE RISE OF INDUSTRY 

Coastal charts and aerial photos dating to the 1920s and 1930s reflect the increasing industrialization of 

the area as well as the continued landfilling and landscape transformation that took place at that time.1 A 

1925 Nautical Chart depicts dramatically reduced wetlands, with only those immediately adjacent to the 

railroad tracks remaining, and it also reflects dredging that occurred to deepen and regulate the Passaic 

River. An updated atlas published by Hopkins in 1934 reflects expansions to the railroad tracks through 

 

1

 Coastal charts dating to the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries were accessed through the digital Historical Map and 

Chart collection of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA). Aerial photographs dating to 

1931, 1946, 1954, 1966, 1970, 1976, 1984, 1991, 1995, 2006, and 2010 and USGS maps published in 1891, 1900, 

1905, 1925, 1947, 1955m 1967, 1981, and 1995 were provided by EDR (2015a and 2015b). Other historic USGS 

maps, including, 1898, were examined through: http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/maps/. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

26 

and in the vicinity of the project site. However, no other development is depicted and the still-vacant area 

to the north of the tracks was identified as the property of the “Newark Factory Sites Company, Inc.” 

Subsequent maps reflect the construction of industrial complexes to the north, as well as the construction 

of the New Jersey Turnpike. The development of the New Jersey Turnpike spurred the development of 

large industrial and commercial facilities in the area. However, no maps indicate that substantial 

development took place within the project site during the historic period (including the 17th through the 

20th centuries) with the exception of development associated with railroad usage. 

In the 1990s, the Kearny Connection was created by linking the New Jersey Transit Morristown Line 

(Morris & Essex Railroad) with the NEC (Hanley 1991). Other improvements were made in the late-20th 

and early-21st century as part of the use and maintenance of the active rail corridor, including track work, 

the construction of instrument houses and other modifications to allow for high speed rail service at the 

Kearny Connection and the surrounding area (Railway Age 1995). 
27 

Chapter 5: Conclusions, Interpretations, and Recommendations

A. SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT 

As part of the background research for this Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study, various 

primary and secondary resources were analyzed, including historic maps and atlases, historic photographs 

and lithographs, newspaper articles, and local histories. The information provided by these sources was 

analyzed to reach the following conclusions. 

DISTURBANCE ASSESSMENT

The project site is entirely located within an area of filled marshland within the former Hackensack 

Meadowlands. Shallow disturbance to the project site may have been generated by dredging, channeling, 

and salt hay farming that occurred during the early portion of the historic period. But significant, 

widespread disturbance would have occurred beginning in the 19th century, when the rail lines were first 

constructed. That landscape modification involved filling and pile driving throughout the project site. 

Additional deep disturbance would have occurred during the expansion of the rail lines in the late 19th 

and early 20th centuries. Additional tracks, bridges, electrical systems, telegraph poles, and other railwayrelated structures were constructed at that time, which would also have required filling and deep support 

foundations. The depths to which the disturbance extended may have been more than 30 to 80 feet in 

certain locations. 

PREHISTORIC SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT

The prehistoric sensitivity of project sites in the northeastern United States is generally evaluated by a 

site’s proximity to level slopes, water courses, well-drained soils, and previously-identified prehistoric 

archaeological sites. The project site was historically part of the Meadowlands and was inundated tidal 

marsh prior to the landfilling efforts that allowed for the marsh to be converted for rail use. The project 

site would therefore not have been an ideal site for camping or hunting and gathering, or seasonal 

occupation during the time that it was inundated.

However, prior to the rise of sea levels several thousands of years ago, the site would have been dry land 

that may have been inhabitable by the earliest groups of humans that occupied the region during the 

prehistoric period. Soil borings suggest that the boundary between alluvial soils and glacial till, possibly 

representing the pre-marsh ground surface within the project site, is situated between 20 and 30 feet 

below the current ground surface. It is therefore possible that a precontact ground surface could have been

located at that depth at one time. However, such a ground surface may have been extensively disturbed as 

a result of disturbances associated with driving piles and constructing deep foundations to support the rail 

structures within the landfill. 

If undisturbed prehistoric ground surfaces are present at great depths beneath the project site, they would 

be considered to be archaeologically sensitive. As described in Chapter 3: Prehistoric Period, a deeplyburied Native American site was identified in 2011 to the northeast of the project site, within another 

landfilled portion of the Meadowlands. As part of an archaeological investigation on that site, which was 

determined to have been on an anomalous rise of land within the meadows, alluvial soils situated between 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

28 

9 and 17 feet below the ground surface were found to contain prehistoric archaeological resources (Audin 

and Stiteler 2011). Additional archaeological resources were thought to be present in that location at 

depths of 15 feet or more. 

The Sawtooth Bridges replacement project site does not appear to have been located on a similar elevated 

area, and therefore, potential archaeological resources would be expected to be located at greater depths. 

Given the extent to which railroad-related activities likely disturbed those depths, the project site is 

determined to have low potential to yield intact prehistoric archaeological deposits at depths of 

approximately 10 to 30 feet or more below the ground surface. If the soils in this area were intact, they 

could potentially yield archaeological resources associated with the prehistoric occupation of the project 

site. 

HISTORIC SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT 

As mentioned previously, the project site was occupied by inundated marshland until the early 19th 

century when the first railroad tracks were constructed through the area. No evidence exists to suggest 

that the project site was occupied during the historic period. A single map-documented structure not 

associated with railroad uses was located near the project site in the early 19th century. Historic maps 

indicate that this structure was located within the marsh and it appears that this structure may have been 

used for agricultural purposes. Extensive development and redevelopment has occurred within the project 

site as a result of the construction and re-construction of various railroad-related structures, including 

bridges, berms, catenary poles, utilities, and other infrastructure. The project site is therefore determined 

to have no sensitivity for archaeological resources dating to the historic period. 

B. RECOMMENDATIONS 

The project site has been determined to have low sensitivity for prehistoric resources at depths greater 

than 10 to 30 feet and no sensitivity for historic period resources. If undisturbed prehistoric ground 

surfaces exist at great depths, they may contain archaeological resources that would provide new 

information about the earliest occupation of the Meadowlands area before the rise of sea levels. However, 

because no soil borings can be advanced within the boundaries of the project site, the extent to which the 

alluvial soils present beneath the project site have survived the deep disturbance associated with the 

construction of the railroads, bridges, and their associated utilities is unknown. In those locations where 

deep disturbance has already occurred, such as the locations of the Sawtooth Bridges themselves, it is 

expected that there is little chance that archaeologically sensitive depths would remain intact. However, 

other areas that have not been subjected to deep disturbance, such as the portions of the rail corridor that 

have been built up and do not contain utilities, could contain undisturbed alluvial soils that could contain 

archaeological resources. 

Archaeological monitoring is recommended for those areas where the construction of the proposed 

project would result in disturbance to depths greater than 10 feet below the ground surface in previously 

undisturbed areas. No monitoring is recommended in those locations where deep disturbance has already 

occurred, such as within the footprints of the existing bridges and in locations where piles have been 

driven to support the existing tracks. When the project design is advanced and additional information is 

known regarding the specific sub-surface impacts of the Proposed Project, those plans will be reviewed 

by a qualified archaeologist. The archaeologist will determine if the Proposed Project could potentially 

impact archaeologically sensitive depths and to determine those locations where monitoring will be 

required, should any exist. In the event that soil borings can be advanced within the project site, they 

should also be reviewed by an archaeologist to determine if potentially sensitive alluvial deposits such as 

those observed in adjacent areas are present within the project site to further clarify those locations that 

would require archaeological monitoring during construction. Finally, in the event that the proposed 
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations 

29 

construction methodology would not allow an archaeologist to monitor the site at depths greater than 10 

feet (e.g., in those locations where piles will be driven), then no archaeological monitoring is 

recommended. Prior to any archaeological monitoring, an archaeological monitoring program will be 

developed in consultation with NJHPO to further investigate the archaeological sensitivity of those areas. 
30 

References

American Society of Civil Engineers 

1910 New York Tunnel Extension: The Pennsylvania Railroad. Volume 2. New York: American Society 

of Civil Engineers. 

Audin, Michael and John Steitler for Langan Engineering and Environmental Services 

2011 New Jersey State Museum Archaeological Site Registration Program Site Form for Site 28-HD44, the “SCCC Site.” On file at NJSM. 

Barry, P., editor 

1854 The Horticulturalist and Journal of Rural Art and Rural Taste. Volume IV. Rochester: James 

Vick, Jr. 

Becker, Marshall J. 

1999 “Cash Cropping by Lenape Foragers: Preliminary Notes on Native Maize Sales to Swedish 

Colonists and Cultural Stability During the Colonial Period.” In, Bulletin of the Archaeological 

Society of New Jersey 54(1): pp. 45-68. 

Bien, Joseph Rudolph & Cornelius Clarkson Vermule 

1891 Newark to Paterson East. New York, New York: Julius Bien. 

Boesch, Eugene 

1994 Archaeological Evaluation and Sensitivity Assessment of Staten Island, New York. For: The New 

York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. 

Bolton, Reginald Pelham

1922 “Indian Paths in the Great Metropolis.” In Indian Notes and Monographs. Miscellaneous #22. 

New York: Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation. 

1934 Indian life of long ago in the city of New York. New York: J. Graham. 

1975 New York City in Indian Possession. Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, New 

York. 

Burrows, Edwin G. and Mike Wallace 

1999 Gotham. New York: Oxford University Press. 

Cantwell, Anne-Marie and Diana diZerega Wall 

2001 Unearthing Gotham: The Archaeology of New York City. New Haven: Yale University Press. 

Couper, William 

1912 History of the Engineering Construction and Equipment of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company’s 

New York Terminal and Approaches. New York: Isaac Blanchard Co. 

Dincauze, Dena F. 

2000 “The Earliest Americans: The Northeast.” Common Ground: Archaeology and Ethnography in 

Public Interest. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service. 
References 

31 

EDR 

2015a “The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package: Amtrak Sawtooth Bridges, Hudson County, Kearny, NJ 

07032: Inquiry Number 4350946.5; July 17, 2015.” Prepared for AKRF, Inc., New York, NY. 

2015b “EDR Historical Topographic Map Report: Amtrak Sawtooth Bridges, Hudson County, Kearny, 

NJ 07032: Inquiry Number 4350946.6; July 14, 2015.” Prepared for AKRF, Inc., New York, NY. 

Faden, William 

1777 The Province of New Jersey Divided into East and West and commonly called The Jerseys. 

Charing Cross: Wm. Faden. Facsimile produced by J. Bien, NY. 

Gerdes, F.H. 

1871-1874 U.S. Coast Survey: Hackensack and Passaic Rivers and Vicinity. Washington, D.C.: United States 

Coastal Survey. 

Grumet, Robert S. 

1981 Native American Place Names in New York City. New York: Museum of the City of New York. 

1995 Historic Contact. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. 

Hammond, John T. 

1845 Distance Map of the State of New Jersey. Available at: 

http://mapmaker.rutgers.edu/HISTORICALMAPS/NJ_1845.jpg. 

Hanley, Robert 

1991 “New Jersey to Add Trains to Midtown.” In, The New York Times. May 1, 1991: page B2. New 

York, NY. 

Hassler F.R. 

1844-1845 Map of New-York Bay and Harbor and the Environs. United States Coastal Survey.

Historical Perspectives, Inc. 

2005 Phase 1A Archaeological Assessment: Brooklyn Bridge Park Project; Blocks 1, 7, 16, 25, 26, 45, 

199, 208, 245, 258, and Portions of Pearl, Washington, New Dock, Fulton, and Joralemon Streets 

and Atlantic Avenue; Bounded Roughly by Atlantic Avenue, Jay Street, and the East River; 

Brooklyn, Kings County, New York. For: AKRF, Inc., New York, NY. 

Hopkins, G.M. 

1873 Combined Atlas of the State of New Jersey and the County of Hudson. Philadelphia: G.M. Hopkins 

& Co. 

1909 Atlas of Hudson County, New Jersey. Philadelphia: G.M. Hopkins Co. 

1934 Atlas of Hudson County, New Jersey. Philadelphia: G.M. Hopkins Co. 

Hoyt, J.K. 

1918 Pen and Pencil Pictures on the Delaware, Lackawanna, and Western Railroad. New York: W.H. 

Cadwell. 

Ingersoll, Ernest 

1881 The History and Present Condition of the Fishery Industries: The Oyster Industry. Washington, 

DC: Government Printing Office. 

Isachsen, Y.W., E. Landing, J.M. Lauber, L.V. Rickard, W.B. Rogers, editors. 

2000 Geology of New York: A Simplified Account. Second Edition. New York: New York State 

Museum Educational Leaflet 28. 

Jonnes, Jill 

2007 Conquering Gotham: A Gilded Age Epic: The Construction of Penn Station and Its Tunnels. New 

York: Viking. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

32 

Krasner, Barbara 

2000 Images of America: Kearny. Charleston, SC: Arcadia. 

Kurlansky, Mark 

2006 The Big Oyster: History on the Half Shell. New York: Ballantine Books. 

Lane, Wheaton J. 

1939 From Indian Trail to Iron Horse: Travel and Transportation in New Jersey, 1620-1860. Princeton, 

NJ: Princeton University Press. 

Langan Engineering & Environmental Services 

2012 “Archaeological Monitoring Report During Construction of the Slurry Wall for the Standard 

Chlorine Chemical Company Site, Interim Response Action Work Plan, Town of Kearny, Hudson 

County, New Jersey.” Prepared for Peninsula Restoration Group for submission to the United 

States Environmental Protection Agency and the State of New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection Historic Preservation Office. 

Lenik, Edward J. 

1999 Indians in the Ramapos: Survival, Persistence, and Presence. New Jersey: The North Jersey 

Highlands Historical Society. 

Louis Berger Group [LBG] 

2004 Phase 1A Archaeological Assessment: Proposed Fulton Street Transit Center. Prepared for New 

York City Transit, New York, NY. 

2005 Potter’s Field Disinterment/Reinterment; Secaucus Interchange Project; Secaucus New Jersey; 

Technical Report. Prepared for: New Jersey Turnpike Authority, Woodbridge, New Jersey. 

Lutins, Allen H. and Anthony P. DeCondo 

1999 “The Fair Lawn/Paterson Fish Weir.” In, Bulletin of the Archaeological Society of New Jersey 54: 

pp. 7-11. 

Marshall, Stephen 

2004 “The Meadowlands Before the Commission: Three Centuries of Human Use and Alteration of the 

Newark and Hackensack Meadows.” In, Urban Habitats 2(1): pp. 4 to 27. 

Mead, Peter B., editor 

1860 The Horticulturalist and Journal of Rural Art and Rural Taste. Volume XV. New York: C.M. 

Saxton and Barker. 

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Science, Research, and Technology 

1999 “Geologic Map of New Jersey.” Available at: 

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/njgs/enviroed/freedwn/psnjmap.pdf. 

New Jersey Historic Preservation Office [NJHPO] 

1997 New Jersey Historic Preservation Plan. Trenton: Department of Environmental Protection; 

Division of Parks & Forestry, Historic Preservation Office. 

New Jersey Railroad and Transportation Company [NJRR] 

1841 “To the Stockholders of the N.J. Railroad and Transportation Co.” February 22, 1841. In, United 

States Commercial & Statistical Register 4(11): pp. 164-166. March 17, 1841; Samuel Hazard, 

editor. 
References 

33 

New Jersey State Agricultural Experiment Station 

1914 Thirty-Fifth Annual Report of the New Jersey State Agricultural Experiment Station and the 

Twenty-Seventh Annual Report of the New Jersey Agricultural College Experiment Station for the 

year ending October 31st, 1914. Paterson, NJ: News Printing Co., State Printers. 

New Jersey State Legislature 

1857 Appendix to the House Journal for Eighteen Hundred and Fifty-Seven. Flemington, NJ: Adam 

Bells, Printer. 

New York Archaeological Council 

1994 Standards for Cultural Resource Investigations and the Curation of Archaeological Collections in 

New York State. The New York Archaeological Council. 

New York Times

1857 “The Central Park Commissioners.” In, The New York Times. October 1, 1857: page 1. New York, 

NY.

1860 “Died.” In, The New York Times. November 21, 1860: page 4. New York, NY. 

Pitman, Samuel C. 

1860 “Trees!! Trees!! Trees!!” In, The Working Farmer 12(140): p. 191. 

Plant, Jeremy F., editor 

2007 Handbook of Transportation Policy and Administration. Associate editor: Van R. Johnson; 

Assistant editor: Cristina E. Ciociclan. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. 

Portal Partners (Gannett Fleming, HNTB, and Jacobs) 

2013a “Site Inspection & Condition Survey: Amtrak Sawtooth Conceptual Design.” Mary 14, 2013. 

2013b “Alternatives Analysis: Amtrak Sawtooth Conceptual Design.” Volumes I and II. June 18, 2013. 

Railway Age

1995 “The Railway Market.” In, Railway Age. 196(6): page 8. 

Ritchie, William A. 

1980 The Archaeology of New York State: Revised Edition. Harrison, New York: Harbor Hill Books. 

Robertson, Patrick 

2011 Robertson’s Book of Firsts: Who Did What for the First Time. New York: Bloomsbury. 

Schuberth, Christopher J. 

1968 The Geology of New York City and Environs. Garden City, New York: The American Museum of 

Natural History, the Natural History Press. 

Scientific American

1868 “Diking and Damming the New Jersey Meadows.” In Scientific American, 24 (5): pp. 65-66. 

Scott, William W. 

1922 History of Passaic and Its Environs. Volume II. New York and Chicago: Lewis Historical 

Publishing Company, Inc. 

Sidney, J.C. 

1849 Sidney's Map of Twelve Miles around New-York. Philadelphia: engraved by N. Friend. 

Sloane, Eric 

1965 A Reverence for Wood. New York: Ballantine Books. 
Sawtooth Bridges Replacement Project—Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study 

34 

Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture 

n.d. Web Soil Survey. Available online at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed July 2015. 

Smith, J. Calvin 

1844 Map of Long Island with the environs of New-York and the Southern part of Connecticut. New 

York: J.H. Colton & Co. 

1847 Map of Long Island with the environs of New-York and the Southern part of Connecticut. New 

York: J.H. Colton & Co. 

Stinson, Robert R. 

1915 Hudson County To-Day: Its History, People, Trades, Commerce, Institutions, and Industries. 

Union, NJ: Hudson Dispatch. 

Stokes, I.N. Phelps 

1967 (reprint) The Iconography of Manhattan Island, 1498-1909. Volumes I-VI. New York: Robert Dodd. 

Sullivan, Robert 

1998 The Meadowlands. New York: Doubleday. 

Teal, John and Mildred 

1969 Life and Death of the Salt Marsh. New York: Ballantine Books 

Thomas, J.J. 

1877 Rural Affairs: A Practical and Copiously Illustrated Register of Rural Economy and Rural Taste. 

Volume II. Albany: Luther Tucker & Son. 

Thorburn, George C. 

1843 Catalogue of Kitchen Garden, Flower, Tree & Grass Seeds, Bulbous and Dahlia Roots; 

Greenhouse Plants; Gardening, Agricultural, and Botanical Books; Garden Tools, etc. New York: 

Vinten, Printer. 

Thorburn, Grant 

1853 Life and Writings of Grant Thorburn: Prepared by Himself. New York. Edward Walker. 

Thorburn, J.M. 

1854 “Fruit and Ornamental Trees.” In, The American Farmer. April 1854 9(10): p. 327. 

Transit Link Consultants [TLC] 

2005 Access to the Region’s Core: Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Phase 1A Archaeological 

Survey Report. Version 2.0. Prepared for: New Jersey Transit. In association with: Lawler, 

Matuskey & Skelly, Louis Berger & Associates, K.S. Engineers, K.M. Chang, Matrix, Zetlin 

Strategic Communications, Robinson Aerial Surveys, Inc., In-group, Inc., Anne Strauss-Weider, 

Inc., Organizational Learning Associates, and A.D. Marble Company. 

Treese, Lorett 

2006 Railroads of New Jersey: Fragments of the Past in the Garden State Landscape. Mechanicsburg, 

PA: Stackpole Books. 

United States Coast and Geodetic Survey 

1866 Coast Chart No. 120: New York Bay and Harbor, New York. Accessed through NOAA’s 

Historical Map & Chart Collection: Image (CP2519C).

1889 Bay and Harbor of New York. Accessed through NOAA’s Historical Map & Chart Collection 

(Image: 369-08-1889). 
References 

35 

1906 Coast Chart No. 120: New York Bay and Harbor, New York. Accessed through NOAA’s 

Historical Map & Chart Collection: Image (120-06-1906). 

1912 Coast Chart No. 120: New York Bay and Harbor, New York. Accessed through NOAA’s 

Historical Map & Chart Collection: Image (120-07-1912). 

1914 Coast Chart No. 120: New York Bay and Harbor, New York. Accessed through NOAA’s 

Historical Map & Chart Collection: Image (120-04-1914). 

1925 New York Harbor. Accessed through NOAA’s Historical Map & Chart Collection: Image (369-

09-1925). 

Van Winkle, Daniel, editor-in-chief 

1924 History of the Municipalities of Hudson County, New Jersey 1630-1923. Volume I. New York and 

Chicago: Lewis Historic Publishing Company, Inc. 

Vernon Historical Society 

n.d. “Black Creek Site.” Accessed July 2015: 

http://www.vernonhistoricalsociety.com/site/Black_Creek_Site.html. 

Vinckeboons, Joan 

1639 “Manatvs gelegen op de Noot [sic] Riuier.” [The Manatus Map]. In the Collection of the Library 

of Congress Geography and Map Division, Washington, DC. 

Walling, H.F. 

1860 Map of New York and its Environs. New York: S.F. Tilden. 

Watson, William 

1812 Map of the State of New Jersey. Accessible through: 

http://historicalcharts.noaa.gov/historicals/preview/image/853-9-1812. 

Whitehead, John 

1901 The Passaic Valley, New Jersey. New York: The New Jersey Genealogical Company. 

Wilson, James G. and John Fiske, editors 

1889 Appleton’s Cyclopædia of American Biography. Volume VI. New York: D. Appleton and 

Company/ 
 

Figures 
PASSAIC RIVER

§ ̈¦280

8/18/2016

0 1,000 FEET

Figure 1

Project Site

USGS Quad Maps Showing the Project Location

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT
Archaeological Area of Potential Effects

Historic Districts

Historic Properties

Photograph Reference Number and Viewing Direction

§ ̈¦280

§ ̈¦95

1 2

3 4

5

6

Sanford Ave

Newark Tpke

Newark Tpke

Albert Ave

Blanchard St

3Rd St

Lister Ave

Pennsylvania Ave

Harrison Ave

Bergen Ave

Joseph St

Esther St

Lockwood St

Boylan Ave

Duk e s St

Jacobus Ave

Chapel St

Passaic River

8/18/2016

0 1,000 FEET

Figure 2

Source: NJDEP, Historic Preservation Office.

Aerial Photograph Showing Known Historic Districts

Old Main Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Historic District

Pennsylvania Railroad New York to Philadelphia Historic District

Pennsylvania Railroad New York Bay Branch Historic District

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

1

Amtrak Substation 4

Hudson Tower
8/4/2015

0 2,500 FEET

Figure 3

Project Site

Ca. 1844-1845 Hassler Coastal Survey

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Note: This map was georeferenced to align the modern and historic streetbeds. 

Due to inaccuracies in the original map and landscape modification that has altered 

topographical features, the location of the Project Site should be considered approximate.
280

95

Kearny

Harrison

Newark

Newark Tpke

Newark Tpke

Lockwood St

Albert Ave

Blanchard St

Sanford Ave

3Rd St

Lister Ave

Pennsylvania Ave

Harrison Ave

Bergen Ave

Boylan Ave

Catherine St

Cornelia St

Joseph St

Esther St

Chapel St

Jacobus Ave

Passaic

River

7/17/2015

0 1,000 FEET

Figure 4

Project Site

Municipal Boundary

SecA - Secaucus artifactual fine sandy loam - not prime farmland

URWETB - urban land - not prime farmland

UdrC - udorthents, refuse substratum - not prime farmland

WectA - westbrook mucky peat - not prime farmland

WATER - not prime farmland

Source: USDA, SSURGO web soil survey

USDA Soils Maps

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT
8/6/2015

0 2,500 FEET

Figure 5

Project Site

1860 Walling Map

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Note: This map was georeferenced to align the modern and historic streetbeds. 

Due to inaccuracies in the original map and landscape modification that has altered 

topographical features, the location of the Project Site should be considered approximate.
8/3/2015

0 5,000 FEET

Figure 6

Project Site

Source: USGS

1898 USGS Map

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Note: This map was georeferenced to align the modern and historic streetbeds. 

Due to inaccuracies in the original map and landscape modification that has altered 

topographical features, the location of the Project Site should be considered approximate.
Photographs
8.17.16

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Photograph 1: View west from the northern side of the project site; one of the Sawtooth Bridges (Amtrak Bridge 

No. 7.96) is located at the left of the photo, leading to the elevated embankment that carries the 

NEC and south of the built-up area on which the NJ TRANSIT tracks are located.

Photograph 2: View east from the northern side of the project site towards one of the Sawtooth Bridges (Amtrak 

Bridge No. 7.80 at the center of the photograph.)

Site Photographs
8.17.16

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Photograph 4: Looking west at the western end of the project site. The elevated embankment that carries the NEC 

line (at left) slopes down towards the ground surface in this location.

Photograph 3: View east from a point near the western end of the project site, showing the changes in grade 

along the NEC (at right) and the NJ TRANSIT lines (center).

Site Photographs
8.17.16

SAWTOOTH BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Photograph 6: The northern side of the 

vicinity of the New Jersey TSubstation No. 4 visible in tphotograph.

Photograph 5: View south of the change in grade 

between the NEC and the NJ TRANSIT tracks in the vicinity of a brick and concrete drainage culvert that carries Frank’s Creek to the Passaic River.
Appendix A: Qualifications
ELIZABETH D. MEADE, RPA 

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR/SENIOR ARCHAEOLOGIST 

Elizabeth D. Meade, a Technical Director and senior archaeologist with AKRF, holds a Master’s degree in 

Anthropology from Hunter College of the City University of New York and is experienced in the survey and 

documentation of archaeological resources. She has conducted numerous cultural resources investigations 

including Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Studies and Phase 1B, Phase 2, and Phase 3 archaeological 

testing in both New York City and New York State for agency approval pursuant to the State Environmental 

Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR). Ms. Meade has authored 

archaeological assessments for environmental impact statements, Phase 1A, Phase 1B, Phase 2, and Phase 3 

archaeological field testing reports, disturbance memoranda, and archaeological monitoring and/or testing plans, 

and has experience in conducting archaeological fieldwork and laboratory analysis. Ms. Meade also serves as 

AKRF’s Laboratory Director. 

Before joining AKRF, Ms. Meade was employed by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, 

where she conducted extensive research for the New York City Cemetery Survey. This research served as the basis 

for her Master’s Thesis documenting the historic cemeteries of Queens and Staten Island. In addition, Ms. Meade 

has authored numerous journal articles and professional papers and recently co-authored a chapter in, Tales of 

Gotham: Historic Archaeology and Ethnohistory in New York City, which was edited by Diane Dallal and Meta Janowitz 

and published by Springer in 2013. 

Education 

M.A., Anthropology, CUNY Hunter College, New York, New York, 2006 

B.A., Anthropology, New York University, New York, New York, 2004 

Certifications/Licenses 

Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA) 

Meets Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Cultural Resources Professionals (36 CFR 

Part 61, Appendix A) 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration 10-Hour Certification in Construction Safety and Health Training 

Amtrak Contractor Orientation Safety Training (2015) 

Professional Memberships 

New York State Archaeological Association (NYSAA), Metropolitan Chapter—Member, former Secretary 

Professional Archaeologists of New York City (PANYC)—Member 

Society for Historical Archaeology (SHA)—Member 

Council for Northeast Historical Archaeology (CNEHA)—Member 

Years of Experience 

Year started in company: 2006 

Year started in industry: 2004 
ELIZABETH D. MEADE, RPA 

SENIOR ARCHAEOLOGIST p. 2

RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

World Trade Center Vehicular Security Center, NY 

AKRF is providing the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) and the Lower Manhattan 

Development Corporation (LMDC) with environmental consulting services in association with the WTC Vehicular 

Security Center. AKRF prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the WTC Vehicular Security Center and 

conducted extensive archaeological investigations. Ms. Meade served as the Assistant Project Manager for the 

project. She and her colleagues provided archaeological monitoring services during construction and documented a 

number of archaeological resources, including an early wood water pipe and extensive timber wharf structures. The 

most notable discovery, which garnered international media attention, was the wooden hull of an 18th century 

merchant vessel. In a compressed time period, Ms. Meade and her colleagues efficiently uncovered and 

documented the significant archaeological find and carefully tagged, inventoried, and removed each timber for 

conservation. Concurrently, AKRF conducted appropriate consultation with agencies and consulting parties in 

accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. AKRF is currently teaming with historic 

ship experts and other professionals to analyze the recovered vessel timbers and associated artifacts. Ms. Meade 

has authored and co-authored several papers and articles describing the find and has made numerous presentations 

about the ship at professional conferences and professional society meetings (see below). 

LMDC East River Waterfront Access Project, New York, NY 

AKRF was retained by the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC) to prepare an Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) for the City’s proposed development along the East River waterfront in Lower Manhattan. 

The plan would improve a two-mile-long public open space connecting Whitehall Ferry Terminal and Peter Minuit 

Plaza to East River Park with expanded open space and recreational facilities, cultural uses, and infrastructure 

improvements. The waterfront, many piers and the upland area under the elevated FDR Drive, including South 

Street, are included within the boundaries of the project. The esplanade as well as the piers would be renovated 

and redeveloped. Ms. Meade authored four Phase 1A documentary studies associated with proposed development 

projects located along the East River waterfront at Peck Slip, Rutgers Slip, Catherine Slip, and Montgomery Street. 

These Phase 1A reports documented the long history of the slips and their development as well as their potential 

to contain archaeological resources.

Water for the Future: Delaware Aqueduct Rondout-West Branch Tunnel Repair Program, Various 

Locations, New York 

AKRF is currently leading the environmental impact assessment and permitting efforts for the New York City 

Department of Environmental Protection’s Water for the Future: Delaware Aqueduct Rondout-West Branch 

Tunnel Repair Program, in association with the Joint Venture engineering team of Hatch Mott McDonald and 

Malcolm Pirnie. The preparation of the EIS for the first part of the program and the related federal, state and local 

permits and approvals are proceeding simultaneously to ensure that the program meets a 2013 date for 

groundbreaking. Ms. Meade serves as the Archaeological Resources Task Project Manager for the project and has 

completed several archaeological assessments of the project site—including Phase 1A and Phase 1B 

investigations—and has managed additional archaeological investigations of the project site by sub-consultants. In 

addition, Ms. Meade has coordinated extensively with the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and 

Historic Preservation to assess and document the archaeological sensitivity of the project site.

Hudson Square Rezoning, New York, NY 

AKRF provided strategic planning services and prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the 

rezoning of an 18-block area in the Hudson Square neighborhood of Manhattan. AKRF’s services included 

preparing potential development scenarios under various rezoning options to help the client, Trinity Real Estate, 

understand the environmental issues that could affect such areas as public schools, open space, historic resources, 
ELIZABETH D. MEADE, RPA 

SENIOR ARCHAEOLOGIST p. 3

transportation and parking, pedestrian circulation, air quality, and noise. Ms. Meade prepared a Phase 1A 

Archaeological Documentary Study of lots within the rezoning area.

New York University Core, New York, NY 

By 2031, NYU proposes to construct nearly three million square feet of new academic uses at their academic core 

near Washington Square Park in Manhattan. AKRF is providing a range of environmental planning services such 

as planning and technical support, preparation of an EIS, and post-EIS support. Ms. Meade prepared a Phase 1A 

Archaeological Documentary of the project site, which included a sensitivity assessment of two superblocks and 

in-depth documentary research of selected lots within the project site. 

West 44th Street and Eleventh Avenue Rezoning, New York, NY 

AKRF prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)for the West 44th Street and Eleventh Avenue rezoning 

project. The proposed rezoning would permit the redevelopment of the project site with new residential buildings, 

a new school building, and new residential uses in an existing historic school building. Ms. Meade prepared a Phase 

1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the project site, completed Phase 1B field testing within the areas 

identified as archaeologically sensitive in the Phase 1A, and co-authored the final Phase 1B report summarizing the 

findings of the archaeological investigation. 

Sportime Randall’s Island Tennis Center Annex, New York, NY

AKRF prepared an Environmental Assessment Statement (EAS) for the proposed Sportime Randall’s Island 

Tennis Center Annex. Ms. Meade authored a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the site, which is in 

close proximity to the city’s former Potter’s Field, and also prepared an Unanticipated Discoveries Plan to outline 

the steps that should be taken in the event that human remains are encountered during construction. 

CornellNYC Tech, Roosevelt Island, NY 

AKRF prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Cornell University’s proposed new applied science 

and engineering campus on Roosevelt Island. This project, which is proposed in response to New York City’s 

Applied Science NYC initiative, is expected to serve as a focal point for accelerating existing sectors of NYC’s 

economy and driving the formation of new technology businesses through close ties to customers and core 

industry knowledge. The EIS was completed on an aggressive time schedule, which included a commitment to 

submit a complete preliminary draft EIS to the lead agency within 60 days of the public scoping meeting. Ms. 

Meade prepared a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the project site. 

Prospect Plaza Redevelopment Plan, Brooklyn, NY 

The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) proposes to redevelop Prospect Plaza, a vacant high-rise public 

housing site in Brooklyn’s Ocean Hill-Brownsville neighborhood. The project would create 450 new affordable 

residential units, a fresh foods grocery store, a community center, and open space. The proposed development 

would help to address the continuing need for quality affordable housing in New York City, and return this site to 

use as a community asset. Ms. Meade authored a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the project site, 

completed Phase 1B field testing within the areas identified as archaeologically sensitive in the Phase 1A, and coauthored the final Phase 1B report summarizing the findings of the archaeological investigation.

Seward Park Mixed-Use Development Project, New York, NY 

The Office of the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, in coordination with the New York City Economic 

Development Corporation and the City of New York Department of Housing Preservation & Development, are 

sponsoring an approximately 1.7 million gross-square-foot mixed-use development project on 9 sites located on 
ELIZABETH D. MEADE, RPA 

SENIOR ARCHAEOLOGIST p. 4

the Lower East Side of Manhattan, which form the largest underdeveloped City-owned site south of 96th Street. 

AKRF led the preparation of the EIS for this mixed-use proposal and prepared the ULURP application for the 

various street mapping actions. Ms. Meade prepared a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the project 

site, which involved in-depth research of numerous historic lots across a large area. 

Mercy College, Irvington and Dobbs Ferry, New York 

AKRF was retained by Mercy College to provide environmental services associated with proposed improvements 

to the school’s main campus in Dobbs Ferry and Irvington, New York. Ms. Meade served as the archaeological 

resources task manager for the project and completed a Phase 1 Archeological Investigation of the campus, which 

included in-depth documentary research and archaeological testing. 

Peach Lake Sewer District: North Salem and Southeast, NY 

AKRF was retained by the Towns of North Salem and Southeast, New York (in Westchester and Putnam 

Counties, respectively) to complete an archaeological assessment of the site of a proposed sewer district along the 

shores of the Peach Lake. Ms. Meade prepared the Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the site and 

participated in Phase 1B, Phase 2, and Phase 3 archaeological investigations of the area, which resulted in the 

identification of a precontact archaeological site. Ms. Meade also assisted with the laboratory processing and 

analysis of the collected artifacts and contributed to the report that presented the findings. 

Bronx Zoo Intermodal Transportation Facility 

AKRF was retained by the Wildlife Conservation Society to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the 

construction of a proposed Intermodal Transportation Facility within the boundaries of the New York Zoological 

Park in the Bronx, New York. Ms. Meade prepared a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study to document 

the history of the site and to determine its potential to yield significant archaeological resources dating to the 

precontact and historic periods. Ms. Meade also completed Phase 1B Archaeological testing at the Zoo and 

authored a Phase 1B report summarizing the results of the investigation. 

New York City School Construction Authority, Various Locations, NY 

Ms. Meade serves as the Archaeological Resources Task Manager for AKRF’s on-call contract with the New York 

City School Construction Authority (SCA). Ms. Meade has authored numerous disturbance memoranda, Phase 1A 

Archaeological Documentary Studies, testing protocols, and Phase 1B and Phase 2 testing reports for various SCA 

projects throughout the five boroughs of New York City. Ms. Meade has also participated in laboratory processing 

and analysis for various SCA project sites. Ms. Meade recently served as one of the Principal Investigators for 

Phase 2 and Phase 3 Archaeological Investigations at the SCA’s Crabtree Avenue site in the Sandy Ground area of 

Staten Island. The site is located within a National Register of Historic Places-listed Archaeological district in one 

of the oldest free African-American communities in the country. Other projects include Public School 51 (New 

York, NY), the Crown Heights Charter School (Brooklyn, NY), 110-02 Northern Boulevard (Queens, NY), 10 

East 15th Street (New York, NY), and 400 Rider Avenue Charter High School in the Bronx (Bronx, NY). 

City Tech New Academic Building, Brooklyn, NY 

On behalf of the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York (DASNY), AKRF prepared the environmental 

assessment for the City Tech New Academic Building project which involves the construction of a nine-story 

academic building. Ms. Meade served as the Principal Investigator for archaeological resources for this project. Ms. 

Meade completed a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study of the project site which analyzed both the 

occupation and development history of the site as well as its potential to contain human remains associated with a 

historic church that was formerly located on the property. Ms. Meade has also authored a Phase 1B Testing 

Protocol for the project site and continues to coordinate upcoming archaeological testing and monitoring with 
ELIZABETH D. MEADE, RPA 

SENIOR ARCHAEOLOGIST p. 5

DASNY, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC), the New York State Office of Parks, 

Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP), and the remainder of the project team. 

Spring Street Presbyterian Church, New York, NY 

After the discovery of human remains at a construction site located in Manhattan, AKRF, Inc. was retained to 

provide cultural resources services and to prepare a plan for the recovery and analysis of the remains for the 

property, which was the site of an early-19th century church and burial vaults. Ms. Meade conducted site visits to 

assess the condition of the remains and conducted a Topic Intensive Documentary Study of the project site 

detailing the history of the church and its burial vaults. Ms. Meade completed additional documentary research 

based on the human remains and artifacts recovered from the site and has co-authored various articles based on 

that research (see below). Ms. Meade presented a paper based on her research of the Spring Street Church site at 

the Society for Historical Archaeology’s 42nd Annual Conference on Historical and Underwater Archaeology, 

Toronto, Ontario, Canada and has authored or co-authored several published articles about the project. 

SELECTED PAPERS, LECTURES, AND PUBLICATIONS

Meade, Elizabeth D. 

2010 “‘A Free Church for the People:’ The History of the Spring Street Church and ifs Burial Vaults.” 

In, Northeast Historical Archaeology 39(1): 8-18. 

Meade, Elizabeth D. and Rebecca L. White 

2013 “Public Life, Personal Grief: The Contrasting Existence of a 19th Century New York Family.” 

In, Tales of Gotham: Historic Archaeology and Ethnohistory in New York City. Meta F. Janowitz and 

Diane Dallal, editors. Pp. 313-325. New York: Springer. 

Meade, Elizabeth D., A. Michael Pappalardo, Molly McDonald, and Diane Dallal 

2011 “The Documentation and Analysis of Vessel Remains at the World Trade Center Redevelopment 

Site in New York City.” In, ACUA Underwater Archaeology Proceedings 2011. Filipe Castro and 

Lindsey Thomas, editors. Pp. 187-195. Advisory Council on Underwater Archaeology. 

Meade, Elizabeth D. and Diane Dallal 

January 2009 “A Free Church for the People: The History of the Spring Street Church and Its Role in the 

Abolitionist Movement.” Society for Historical Archaeology’s 42nd Annual Conference on 

Historical and Underwater Archaeology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 

Meade, Elizabeth D. and Nichole Doub

March 2011 “Sunk Beneath the City Streets: The Excavation, Analysis, and Care of the World Trade Center 

Ship.” Plenary Session at the Mid-Atlantic Archaeological Conference (MAAC) 2011 Annual 

Meeting, Ocean City, Maryland. 

Pappalardo, A. Michael, Elizabeth D. Meade, Molly McDonald, and Diane Dallal 

January 2011 “The Recordation and Analysis of Vessel Remains at the World Trade Center Site in Manhattan” 

Society for Historical Archaeology’s 44th Annual Conference on Historical and Underwater 

Archaeology, Austin, Texas, Canada. Presented by Elizabeth D. Meade. 

Wiencek, Robert, Elizabeth D. Meade, and Rebecca White. 

January 2009 “Insatiate Archer, Would Not One Suffice?” Society for Historical Archaeology’s 42nd Annual 

Conference on Historical and Underwater Archaeology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 
MOLLY R. MCDONALD, RPA 

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

Molly McDonald, an architectural historian and archaeologist, is experienced in the survey and documentation of 

cultural resources and has produced numerous cultural resource surveys and National Register nominations in 

compliance with federal, state, and local regulations in New York State and throughout the northeast. She has 

completed impacts analyses in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act, the New York 

State Historic Preservation Act, and other legislation, and has devised strategies for mitigating adverse effects. She 

has prepared Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) and Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) 

documentation. She routinely serves as Principal Investigator for all phases of archaeological investigation. She has 

extensive experience in writing archaeological documentary studies (Phase 1As) and testing plans, and in 

conducting archaeological fieldwork and laboratory analysis. Ms. McDonald routinely coordinates with the New 

York City Landmarks Preservation Commission and the State Historic Preservation Office in New York and other 

northeastern states. Before joining AKRF, Ms. McDonald was employed by the Historic House Trust, and 

subsequently served as Monuments Coordinator for the City of New York, Department of Parks. Ms. McDonald 

also worked as an architectural historian and archaeologist for Earth Tech/TAMS consultants prior to joining 

AKRF. 

BACKGROUND

Education 

M.A., Historic Preservation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 2002 

M.A., Buildings Archaeology, University of York, York, England, 2000 

B.A., History, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, 1999 

Licenses/Certifications 

Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA) 

Meets Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Architectural Historians (36 CFR Part 61, 

Appendix A) 

New Jersey State Historic Preservation Office Research Training 

Professional Memberships 

Member, National Trust for Historic Preservation 

Member, Timber Framers Guild 

Member, New York State Barn Coalition 

Member, Vernacular Architecture Forum 

Member, Society for Historical Archaeology 

Member, Council for Northeast Historical Archaeology 

Years of Experience 

Year started in company: 2006 

Year started in industry: 2000 

RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

Amtrak/NJ Transit Portal Bridge Replacement Project EIS, Secaucus, NJ 
MOLLY R. MCDONALD, RPA 

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR p. 2

Amtrak and NJ TRANSIT, in cooperation with the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), plan to increase 

capacity on the Northeast Corridor rail line’s Portal Bridge crossing over the Hackensack River. The proposed 

project is being reviewed under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA). Ms. McDonald serves as Historic Resources Task Manager for the on-going project. 

The historic resources team identified and evaluated potential impacts on historic resources in the study area, 

including the State Register-listed Portal Bridge itself, and multiple other bridges, railroads, and structures. Ms. 

McDonald prepared archaeological documentary studies for the project site, which includes a National Registereligible historic Potter’s Field and assisted in field testing for remains associated with the cemetery. Currently, Ms. 

McDonald is coordinating with the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office and New Jersey Historic Districts 

Council to identify and implement mitigation measures, which will include Historic American Engineering Record 

(HAER) recordation, a salvage plan, and interpretive exhibits. 

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Greenville Yards, Hudson County, NJ 

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) propose 

emergency restoration, maintenance, and replacement of critical system elements to meet modern rail freight 

standards at the Greenville Yards, a vital link in the Cross Harbor rail barge system. Ms. McDonald serves as 

Cultural Resources Task Leader for the project, which is subject to the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The project site contains a massive rail car lift 

bridge and other infrastructure that has been determined State and National Register-eligible both individually and 

as part of the Greenville Yard Historic District. 

PSEG Early Site Permit Application, Salem County, NJ 

AKRF performed numerous cultural resources compliance tasks associated with PSEG’s Early Site Permit 

Application for their Salem County site. Ms. McDonald served as cultural resources task manager for this work. As 

part of this project, Ms. McDonald conducted extensive architectural resources field surveys and conducted 

extensive coordination with both the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office (NJHPO) and Delaware Historic 

Preservation Office (DESHPO). Ms. McDonald prepared an assessment of the potential visual effects of the 

proposed project on architectural resources in the study area. She also completed Intensive Level Survey Forms for 

multiple historic properties in the study area, including early patterned brick houses. Ms. McDonald also oversaw 

the completion of Phase II terrestrial archaeological and submerged cultural resources surveys (Phase II Surveys) 

to determine whether significant (New Jersey State Register [SR] and/or National Register of Historic Places [NR]-

eligible) archaeological and submerged resources are present in the project’s archaeological area of potential effect 

(APE) in Salem County, New Jersey. The project obtained No Adverse Effects determinations from both NJHPO 

and DESHPO. 

PSEG Site Selection, Multiple Locations, NJ 

AKRF assisted PSEG with the analysis of alternative site locations for a potential new facility in multiple counties 

in New Jersey including Salem and Hunterdon Counties. Ms. McDonald served as the cultural resources task 

manager for this project. She conducted screening level archaeological analyses, including archaeological site file 

research at the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office (NJHPO) and New Jersey State Museum (NJSM). For 

architectural resources, Ms. McDonald conducted documentary studies and field surveys for four large study areas, 

each with a radius of ten miles. She identified hundreds of potential architectural resources in these study areas 

ranging from early patterned brick houses to stone barns. Ms. McDonald used this baseline data to generate a 

comparison of the alternative sites in terms of their potential to impact cultural resources. 

Site Selection Study, Multiple Sites, New Jersey 
MOLLY R. MCDONALD, RPA 

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR p. 3

Ms. McDonald serves as Cultural Resources Task Manager for a site selection study on behalf of a confidential 

client planning an industrial facility in New Jersey. As part of this project, Ms. McDonald has performed baseline 

research on cultural resources for sites in several counties in New Jersey. She has identified known architectural 

resources in the vicinity of these sites and has performed archaeological site file research at the New Jersey State 

Museum. 

CZMA Consistency Determination, Outer Continental Shelf Meteorological Stations, Garden State 

Offshore Energy, Multiple Sites, New Jersey 

The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) requires that any federal actions affecting coastal resources should be 

consistent with the enforceable policies of a coastal state’s federally approved Coastal Management Program. The 

proposed project involves the installation of two meteorological towers at locations approximately 20 miles off the 

coast of Southern New Jersey in the Atlantic Ocean. Ms. McDonald conducted baseline cultural resources data 

collection, visiting the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office to review files for multiple sites and synthesizing 

data on previous off-shore bathymetric surveys and archaeological investigations. 

New Jersey Schools Construction Corporation, Historic Preservation and Mitigation Report, Union City 

Elementary School No. 2 – Gilmore School, Union City, Hudson County, New Jersey. 

While at another firm, Ms. McDonald prepared cultural resources documentation in compliance with New Jersey 

Executive Order No. 215. Ms. McDonald identified a National Register-eligible historic district that would be 

impacted by construction of a playground. Ms. McDonald assisted project designers in devising context sensitive 

design for the playground that would complement the historic district, and coordinated with the New Jersey 

Historic Preservation Office. 

New Jersey Department of Transportation, Drainage Improvement Project, US Route 30 (White Horse 

Pike), Winslow Township, New Jersey. 

On behalf of the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), Ms. McDonald collected cultural resources 

data within the area that will be impacted by the drainage improvement project. Ms. McDonald conducted an 

architectural resources survey to identify potential National Register-eligible resources and assessed potential 

impacts on cultural resources. 

PAPERS AND PUBLICATIONS

Archaeological Methodology Applied to Moved Houses on the South Fork of Long Island. Master of Arts 

Dissertation, York University (England), Department of Archaeology, 2000. 

"The Archaeology and History of Moving Houses on the South Fork of Long Island," Vernacular Architecture, York 

City Printers: York, vol. 32. 2001. 

The Abandoned Structures of the Other Islands of New York City: Past, Present, and Future. Masters of Arts 

Thesis, Historic Preservation Planning, Cornell University, 2002. 
Appendix B: Soil Borings Completed as Part of Previous Projects in 

the Vicinity of the Archaeological APE
AMTRAK FILE NO.: AMTRAK Work Element No.: AMTRAK FILE NO.: SUBSURFACE PROFILE

TRACK 3 - STA 4425+25 TO 4437+00

AMTRAK FILE NO.: AMTRAK FILE NO.:

FIG. NO.:

PORTAL_PROFILE PBCE _WIP.GPJ 12/28/11

-160

-140

-120

200 Riverfront Blvd

Elmwood Park, NJ 07407

AMTRAK FILE No.:

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

& Associates, Inc.

100 0 50 100 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (FEET) - TRACK 3 STATIONING HORIZONTAL SCALE ( FEET )

--

ISSUE:

ELEVATION (FEET )

SHEET 1 OF 9

PORTAL BRIDGE CAPACITY

ENHANCEMENT PROJECT

Tel:(201)791-0075

Fax:(201)791-4533 DATE:

CONTRACT NO.: Geotechnical, Environmental & Civil Engineering

BORING BW-369S OFFSET 118 FEET RIGHT FROM TRACK 3, STATION 4428+33

BORING BW-369D OFFSET 100 FEET RIGHT FROM TRACK 3, STATION 4431+66

BORING BW-2 OFFSET 170 FEET LEFT FROM TRACK 3, STATION 4433+77

BORING BW-4 OFFSET 135 FEET LEFT FROM TRACK 3, STATION 4436+65

NOTES:

6

VERTICAL EXAGGERATION = 3X

21

21

20

47

83%,42%

E.O.B.@89'

R

35

40

65

100+

100%,36%

100%,84%

13

13

15

16

E.O.B.@73'

12" RCP

36

41

37

36

36

28

18.02

25

18.01

37

10

17

23

16

23

17

28

18

43

39

6" PVC

25

0

5

22

18

22

25

48

35

31

11

3

7

13

20

R=11409' L=2261.3' (S)

R=11509' L=1810.7' (S)

N/F Amtrak - Penna. Tunnel & Terminal Railroad TURNPIKE AERIAL EASEMENT TURNPIKE PROTECTIVE EASEMENT

R=11359' L=2479.1' (REF #1)

R=11359.20' L=2479.10' (D)

0

0

1

7

27

15

R

R

R

R

R

25

10

15

Brush Brush

Brush

Brush

R

63%,18%

E.O.B.@76' E.O.B.@75'

E.O.B.@24'

Inlet "A" TG 25.32 Inv.in 23.32 Inv. out 23.22

R

 28.8 29.6

 29.5

 31.1 30.8

 29.8

 30.7

 30.6

 28.5

 129.6

 128.4 16

24

100

55

7

10

15

5

25

15

25

20

20

10

10

20

30

25

15

25

5

10

10

5

5

20

25

15

15

5

125

130

120

125

25

15

5

3

21

16

18

5

9

4

2

5

22

15

24

3

6

30

34

26

35

100+

81

0

50%,7%

94%,56%

E.O.B.@42'

0

0

0

3

11

27

29

11

17

19

E.O.B.@78.7'

 123.4

 122.6

 121.4

 120.4

40

27

27

30

33

28

15

25

20

15

5

10

25

 28.6

 29.4

 28.2

 28.3

 28.1

 27.8

 26.5

 23.5

 22.6

 21.5

 28.8

0

0

0

0

2

19

24

16

15

54

30

21

26

17

22

14

69

31

71

36%,7%

31

E.O.B.@70.1'

16

38

6

100%,80%

97%,77%

 127.5

 126.4

 125.5

 124.6

 123.6

 122.3 123.6

 124.6

 125.7

 126.6

 127.5

 128.6

85

32

26

20

22

 129.7

 128.6

 127.7

 126.5

 125.5

 124.6

 123.4

 122.5

 121.6

25

100+

11

18

29

21

19

9

11

3

4

5

 129.5

 128.5

 127.4

 126.5

 125.4

 124.4 24

29

18

17

13

14

19

25

100+

50%,0%

33%,0%

4432+00 4433+00 4434+00 4437+00

GEOTECHNICAL BORING:

F - FILL

GROUNDWATER

4425+00 4426+00 4427+00 4428+00 4429+00 4430+00 4431+00 4435+00 4436+00

CORE RUN RECOVERY (REC) AND

ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) 100%,70%

10

SOIL SAMPLING/ ROCK CORING

N-STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE,

BLOWS PER FOOT

SPT SAMPLER REFUSAL = BLOW COUNT >50

BLOWS/6-INCH INTERVAL 100+

O - ORGANIC DEPOSIT

A - ALLUVIUM

V - GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT

T - GLACIAL TILL

MONITORING WELL INSTALLED DURING

OTHER INVESTIGATIONS AND

MONITORED IN FINAL ENGINNERING

PHASE

RANGE OF GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS

DURING MONITORING PROGRAM

SURFACE WATER OBSERVATION DURING

DRILLING

LEGEND GENERAL NOTES:

EARLY ACTION

PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

EIS

FINAL ENGINEERING

SUBSURFACE STRATIGRAPHY:

R3 - DIABASE BEDROCK

R0 - DECOMPOSED ROCK

(REC<50% FOR MIN 2' RUN)

ROCK:

R1 - WEATHERED BEDROCK (RQD<50%)

R2 - COMPETENT BEDROCK (RQD>50%)

GROUNDWATER LEVEL MEASURED IN

TEMPORARY OBSERVATION WELL

1. BORING LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO THE

NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929

(NGVD29) AND THE NEW JERSEY STATE PLANE

COORDINATE SYSTEM BASED ON NORTH

AMERICAN DATUM (NAD 83).

2. SUBSURFACE PROFILE COMBINES NORTHERLY

AND SOUTHERLY BORING INFORMATION.

BORING PROFILES ARE SET AT APPROXIMATE

BORING LOCATIONS AND ARE OFFSET FROM

EITHER THE TRACK 3 OR TRACK 5 ALIGNMENTS.

3. TRACK STATIONING AND OFFSET

INFORMATION IS NOTED FOR LOCATIONS OF

BORINGS NOT SHOWN ON THE PLAN VIEW. SEE

BORING LOGS FOR NJ PLANE COORDINATES AND

ELEVATIONS.

4436+00

4436+00 4435+00 BW- 4

4432+00

4432+00 4431+00

4431+00

4431+00

4436+00

4429+00

4429+00

4429+00 4426+00 BW-369D

4437+00

4437+00

4437+00

4436+00

4426+00

4426+00 4425+23

4425+25 BW-202

4435+00

4437+00 4435+00

4432+00

4433+00 BW- 2

4433+00

4433+00

4430+00

4428+00

4428+00

4427+00 4428+00 BW-369S BW-201 BW-368

4430+00

4430+00

4427+00

4427+00

4425+24

4433+00

4435+00BW-203

4434+00

4434+00

4434+00

4434+00

WALL A

TRACK 3

TRACK 3

WALL B BW-201

BW-203

BW-202

BW-368
AMTRAK FILE NO.: AMTRAK Work Element No.:

200 Riverfront Blvd

Elmwood Park, NJ 07407

PORTAL_PROFILE COPY PBCE _WIP_09_11 WEST.GPJ PORTAL BRIDGE DATATMPL_REV.GDT 9/28/11

SHEET 2 OF 9

4438+00 4439+00 4440+00 4441+00 4442+00 4443+00 4444+00 4445+00 4446+00 4447+00 4448+00 4449+00 4450+00 4451+00

SUBSURFACE PROFILE

TRACK 3/5 - STA 4437+00 TO 4452+00

4437+00

AMTRAK FILE NO.: AMTRAK FILE NO.: AMTRAK FILE NO.:

FIG. NO.:

DATE:

AMTRAK FILE No.: CONTRACT NO.: --

4452+00

PORTAL BRIDGE CAPACITY

ENHANCEMENT PROJECT

Tel:(201)791-0075

Fax:(201)791-4533

6

ISSUE:

0

0

1

29

14

11

15

28

17

38

29

12

20

6

0

0

17

100+

100+

100+

100+ 73%,53%

E.O.B.@85'

13

15

16

13

14

22

18

10

0

0

0

8

9

9

6

8

5

2

FOR LEGEND AND GENERAL NOTES, SEE SHEET 1 OF 9.

BORING BW-9 OFFSET 133 FEET RIGHT FROM TRACK 3, STATION 4446+20

BORING BW-11 OFFSET 155 FEET RIGHT FROM TRACK 5, STATION 4449+60

42

19

25

100+

85%,50%

E.O.B.@42'

0

21

12

47

23

32

34

23

22

30

E.O.B.@80'

10

9

3

5

-160

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

14

43

1

4

11

19

10

11

7

23

10

1850' (TM)

1730' (TM)

AMTRAK

N/F Amtrak - Penna. Tunnel & Terminal Railroad

^

N74^

S 74^ S 74^ S 74^ S 74^

26.01

18.02

25

 2.7 2.7 2.7

 25.6

 25.6

 25.5

 24.7 25.7

 25.8

 26.3 25.6

 26.1

 25.9

 26.6

 24.3

 27.1

 25.3

 26.6

20

10

25

20

10

5

20

25

15

0

0

0

0

0

2

3

11

8

16

15

8

9

12

8

Inv. RCP -0.62

3

2

6

2

1

7

1

21

3

4

7

8

5

6

12

39

100%,83%

100%,88%

41

41

45

48

39

24

23

15

Headwall

Top 9.55

Top of arch 6.25

8

4

1

0

0

8

100+

93%,55%

E.O.B.@76'

 27.7

 27.3

 27.5

 27.9

 4.8

 26.0

 26.3

 26.3

 5.5 4.5

52%,47%

E.O.B.@80'

7

8

4

3

3

6

3

1

0

0

0

0

2

14

13

16

0

100+

100%,53%

E.O.B.@90.5'

0

5

15

15

15

19

23

42

50

43

47

34

21 E.O.B.@42'

10

5

20

15

5

10 25 25

15 20

10

15

25 20

5

5

15

10

6" CPP

INV. 23.74 INV. 23.10

0

1

11

29

16

36

39

32

41

100+

20

27

21

23

20

24

2

 5.5 MHHW 3.91 MHW 3.62

E.O.B.@70'

20

25

5

15 10

0

5

45

45

46

42

100+

33

56

53

77

32

80

48

40

35

31

26

26

27

22

32

6

19

38

26

69

65

100+

48

17

3

10

12

10

10

29

17

27

46

15

12

7

1

0

0

14

27

100+

100%,90%

100%,80%

E.O.B.@82'

0

0

0

2

40

34

24

24

31

36

NOTES:

& Associates, Inc. Geotechnical, Environmental & Civil Engineering

100 0 50 100 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (FEET) - TRACK 3/5 STATIONING HORIZONTAL SCALE ( FEET )

29

34

29

44

35

30

25

15

25

15

12

17

0

10

20

17

44

0

0

17

37

E.O.B.@83'

27

15

2

5

22

12

11

15

19

1

24

10

12

38

32

37

47

30

62

50

38

41

26

22

13

4

0

33

100+ 88%,62%

E.O.B.@71.7' 0

0

16

18

130

72%,50%

100%,48%

ELEVATION (FEET )

9

35

25

68

100+

83%,70%

E.O.B.@85'

18

19

7

3

5

4

6

3

2

7

3

2

6

4

3

0

1

9

12

39

116

100+

100%,42%

E.O.B.@85'

VERTICAL EXAGGERATION = 3X

4445+00

4445+00 BW- 8

4450+00

4445+00

4451+00 4440+00 4441+00

4441+00 4440+00

4440+00 BW-205 BW- 12

4440+00

4443+00

4438+00

4438+00 4439+00

4439+00

4439+00

4445+00

4450+00

4437+00

4439+00 4441+00

4443+00

4443+00

4446+00

4446+00

4446+00

4446+00

4444+00

4437+00 4438+00

4437+00

4438+00

4442+00

4442+00

4442+00

4442+00 4443+00 4444+00 4448+00

4451+00

4444+00

4444+00

4447+00

4447+00 BW- 5 BW-204 BW- 6 BW- 7

4447+00

4448+00

4449+00

4449+00

4441+00 BW-367D GF-1 BW-307

4437+00 BW- 10 BW- 9 BW- 11

BW-204

BW- 6

WALL B

WALL B

BW- 5

BW-367D

WALL A

BW- 8 BW- 10

GF-1

BW- 7

BW-205

BW- 12

BW-307

TRACK 5

TRACK 3
7

34

8

10

5

0

0

2

1

4465+00

S71^

25.9

30' UTILITY EASEMENT (REF #6)

90' (TM)

179' (TM)

90' (TM)

179' (TM)

80' (TM)

160' (TM)

649' (TM)

660' (TM)

80' (TM)

160' (TM) N/F Amtrak - Penna. Tunnel & Terminal Railroad

160'

 (REF #1)

160'

 (REF #2)

N67^04'W (REF #2)

DATE:

--

0 50 100

ISSUE:

ELEVATION (FEET )

SHEET 3 OF 9

PORTAL BRIDGE CAPACITY

ENHANCEMENT PROJECT

Tel:(201)791-0075

Fax:(201)791-4533

50'E (REF #2)

4466+00

25

24

23

17

11

25

100+

76%,53%

100%,57%

100%,70%

25

22

2

8

13

2

0

3

17

18

-160

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

2

0

0

4

5

13

19

5

16

9

16

12

4

0

2

0

0

2

0

0

100%,63%

5

40

58

190

26%,10%

64%,0%

0%,0%

9

8

100+

E.O.B.@99'

3

4

15

32

11

23

19

16

17

18

9

9

5

6

3

3

6

0

5

8

13

15

45

100+

0

18

2

1

2

12

3

1

0

11

13

100+ E.O.B.@114'

6

1

8

6

6

3

9

8

7

2

7

2

4

0

3

0

0

2

2

0

2

0

4

5

32

27

17

23

21

11

19

24

99

30%,0%

E.O.B.@107'

3

5

4

2

3

15

11

15

35

11

8

11

29

9

11

15

9

7

8

5

7

5

0

0

0

0

3

0

4

7

0

0

0

1

3

3

1

0

0

3

4

0

13

18

10

2

0

21

10

42

18

100+

100+ 87%,28%

75%,28%

67%,0%

E.O.B.@125'

E.O.B.@15'

0

0

3

0

0

2

0

3

0

5

0

0

0

0

5

4

0

5

0

2

88%,38%

99%,84%

6

100+

19

3

11

37

17

17

23

35

15

34

14

17

10

17

6

36

14

19

20

20

40

26

33

23

21

28

21

10

20

10

& Associates, Inc. Geotechnical, Environmental & Civil Engineering HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (FEET) - TRACK 6 STATIONING HORIZONTAL SCALE ( FEET )

0

SUBSURFACE PROFILE

TRACK 6 - STA 4452+00 TO 4466+50

E

6

E.O.B.@15'

FOR LEGEND AND GENERAL NOTES, SEE SHEET 1 OF 9.

BORING BW-23 OFFSET 166 FEET RIGHT FROM TRACK 6, STATION 4459+45

BORING BW-32 OFFSET 135 FEET RIGHT FROM TRACK 6, STATION 4466+46

MONITORING WELL MW-03 OFFSET 167 FEET RIGHT FROM TRACK 6, STATION 4460+23

MONITORING WELL MW-04 OFFSET 74 FEET LEFT FROM TRACK 6, STATION 4461+01

MONITORING WELL MW-05 OFFSET 80 FEET LEFT FROM TRACK 6, STATION 4464+28

80%, 40%

83%,29%

97%,70%

27

100%,63%

100%,63%

0

E.O.B.@130'

NOTES:

65%,25%

5

0

3

0

2

0

0

0

0

5

6

0

0

7

11

0

0

0

14

100+

80%,28%

90%,78%

65%,30%

92%,77%

2

0

0

4

0

0

12

10

7

5

14

8

5

41

13

11

20

6

3

5

6

4

0

1

2

6

4

0

0

1

0

E.O.B.@100'

3

11

10

15

18

7

7

6

1

1

2

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

0

0

1

0

4

0

0

13

25

21

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

0

0

5

12

3

0

11

20

100+

100+

92%,62%

N 74^15' E 2041.52' (REF #2 - TOTAL)

^15'40" W (REF#2) 414.03' (C) S 65 ^23'35" W 646.12' (REF#10) 644.28' (C)

S 65 ^

N 65 ^

N 80^ N 80^40'55" W 179.18' (REF#10) 179.16' (C)

41

42

100+

83%,42%

95%,62%

15

11

11

22

0

0

16

14

7

45

6

12

14

13

13

12

12

14

13

15

11

10

R

R

1

4

3

8

4

0

0

0

27

6

10

0

12

91

24

14

7

24

8

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

15

13

31

62

100+

E.O.B.@118'

100%,97%

100%,62%

7

0

6

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

5

7

0

8

27

54

14

16

6

E.O.B. @15'

71

100+

100%,87%

100%,50%

100%,59%

100%,90%

E.O.B.@135'

5

25

20

15

10

5

5

 2.8

2.5

 2.5

 3.7

 2.9

 2.9

 8.5

 8.6 8.4

 8.9

 8.3

 8.9

 7.5

 7.8

 8.4 7.6

5

3

0

5

21

27

51

16

12

10

8

7

3

0

0

3

0

7

1

6

15

12

18

20

20

13

E.O.B.@120'

7

3

5

3

7

0

41

8

9

28

1

0

18

11

15

13

16

14

3

71

58

100+

100+

100+

83%,28%

93%,82%

100%,55%

100%,77%

0

4

0

4

2

5

2

0

8

0

TELMK

+

TELMK

18

61

26

7

4

16

9

11

3

10

27

24

17

25

44

107

38

22

11

11

14

14

10

0

0

0

3

9

13

2

15

5

9

5

7

6

3

11

9

0

25

38

100+

93%,30%

E.O.B.@120'

22

26

17

23

15

10

16

12

27

5

13

4

0

0

0

0

0

0

100%,42%

95%,72%

100%,55%

8

0

19

11

6

10

9

13

7

4

5

2

8

14

16

18

17

21

38

4

1

23

27

31

19

48

28

50

82

100+

100+

100+

100+

100+

13%,0%

65%,20%

E.O.B.@145'

+

PMG

+

PMG

+

PMG

+

PMG

+

PMG

+

PME

+

PME

+

0

53

37

100+ 67%,40%

7

11

6

8

0

4

0

5

5

10

19

21

69

45

100+

+

+

+

6

7

9

0

2

0

0

2

0

3

4

8

24

60

70

24

55%,7%

100%,52%

E.O.B.@111'

5

 8.1

8.1 8.2

 2.5

 4.3

 5.5

 5.2

 5.1

8

17

7

11

8

7

4

8

1

0

0

1

3

5

7

6

4

5

8

23

22

20%,7%

90%,47%

3

3

9

E.O.B.@127'

0

E.O.B.@120'

15

15

27

14

32

5

3

0

4

0

2

0

0

0

0

11

6

17

14

17

14

10

10

8

12

6

7

5

6

1

 2.9

 5.3

 3.8

3.7

 3.1

3.3

20

25

25

20

15

10

5

5

5

34

11

8

9

2

10

10

7

14

16

21

20

6

17

37

0

34

2

13

22

Headwall

Top Wall 7.96

Inv. 3.05

8" DIP

8" DIP

8" DIP 8" DIP

8" DIP

12" DIP

12" DIP

Inlet "E"

TG 3.01

TG 2.74

12" HDP

Inv. 4.92

12"HDP

12" HDP

Inv. 5.19

12"HDP

15" HDP

6

6

4

0

0

0

10

0

14

100+

97%,43%

100%,65%

92%,62%

97%,70%

E.O.B.@125'

Inv. 3.59 Roof Drain

Roof Drain

Inlet "E"

TG 6.72

Inv. in 3.44

Inv. out 3.31 24" RCP

 2.9

9.4

 8.5

 4.2

 4.9

T

 25.7

25.6

 26.1

 25.9

 26.1

 25.9 25.8

 26.1

 25.8

 25.8

 26.2

 25.5

 25.7

 25.8

 25.9

 26.1

20

10

5

10

15

18

19

15

3

24

19

12

9

9

18

15

11

25

5

0

7

0

0

0

0

22

100+ 48%,20%

95%,42%

E.O.B.@135'

14

100%,87%

100%,8%

100%,88%

E.O.B.@79'

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4

0

4

29

11

7

7

4

4

6

0

E.O.B.@141'

4452+00 4453+00 4454+00 4455+00 4456+00 4457+00 4458+00 4459+00 4460+00 4461+00 4462+00 4463+00 4464+00

2

4

0

0

0

0

11

17

13

100+

80%,36%

100%,33%

94%,69%

100+

100+

6

19

7

7

5

2

2

4

10

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

6

3

5

6

8

9

E.O.B.@112'

0

0

2

1

20

5

12

41

5

15

16

8

17

9

95%,58%

100%,50%

13

15

11

19

13

7

8

9

2

6

1

14

0

11

E.O.B.@132'

AMTRAK FILE NO.: AMTRAK FILE NO.: AMTRAK FILE NO.:

FIG. NO.:

200 Riverfront Blvd

Elmwood Park, NJ 07407

AMTRAK FILE No.: CONTRACT NO.:

PORTAL_PROFILE COPY PBCE _WIP_09_11 WEST.GPJ 9/28/11

AMTRAK FILE NO.:

7

95%,85%

13

12

82

11

21

20

18

23

15

10

100+

9

19

12

21

22

14

11

11

14

12

17

8

5

11

5

7

4

8

4

4

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

5

5

5

14

10

17

19

11

9

4

7

2

9

10

14

13

6

2

3

2

15

E.O.B.@110.1'

24

15

22

25

20 12

19

21

E.O.B.@123'

0

0

0

7

7

46

78%,42%

E.O.B.@115.6'

0

2

3

6

10

4

4

7

21

15

12

24

23

21

29

18

25

12

0

3

2

4

0

0

90%, 58%

92%, 72%

100

AMTRAK Work Element No.:

0

0

1

1

5

13

33

12

23

39

24

100+

90%,37%

87%,32%

E.O.B.@109'

100%,65%

45%,0%

31

36

26

22

12

13

10

10

10

10

10

13

11

11

12

16

15

17

VERTICAL EXAGGERATION = 3X

10

12

5

19

20

29

9

14

11 BW-314 GF-2 BW- 24

4465+00

4457+00

4459+00

4461+00

4461+00

4462+00

4462+00 4463+00

4465+00 4466+00

4466+00 BW-206 BW- 14 CHS-1 MW-04 BW-208 MW-03 BW-211 BW- 30 CHS-2

4454+00

4453+00 4454+00

4453+00 4455+00

4455+00

4452+00

4452+00

4456+00 BW-313

4457+00 4458+00 4460+00

4459+00 4460+00 4463+00BW- 27 BW- 28 MW-05 BW- 31 BW-316

4456+00 BW- 21 BW-207 BW- 25 BW-364

4464+00

4464+00 BW-309

4458+00 BW- 16 BW-310 BW- 23 BW-209 BW-317 BW- 32

BW- 14/CHS-1

BW-309

BW- 16

BW-313

BW-314

GF-2

BW-206

BW- 21

WALL C

WALL B

TRACK 6 TRACK 6

BW-207

BW- 24 BW- 25

BW-209

BW-211

BW-310

BW- 28

BW-316

BW- 31

BW-208 BW-364

BW-317

BW- 27

BW- 30/CHS-2
OL

OL

OL

SM

SM

SM

SP-SM

SP

SP-SM

SP

6.0'

Brown Organic SILT, frequent roots, (ORGANIC

DEPOSIT).

Dark brown medium to fine(+) SAND, some Silt,

frequent roots, (ALLUVIUM).

...little Silt.

...coarse to fine, trace(+) Silt.

...red-brown, some(+) medium to fine Gravel, trace(-)

Silt.

...gray-brown, coarse to fine, trace Silt, trace medium

to fine Gravel.

Gray coarse to fine SAND, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

0.3'

1.0'

1.5'

0.7'

1.5'

0.4'

1.0'

0.7'

15

50

75

35

75

20

55

35

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WH

WH

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

12

15

17

3

4

11

8

12

18

22

29

7

12

15

22

11

12

15

50/4"

10

18

12

11

Depth to mudline 1'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

S-9: 7.6%<#200

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -5.7'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE: 3/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696835.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 76'

END 3/24/09

START 3/20/09

BORING NO. BW- 2

ELEVATION: 0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 3/24/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597675.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

17.8

18.0

20.0
SP

CL

CL

ML

CL

CL

CL

22.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray brown coarse to fine SAND, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray SILT & CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown varved Clayey SILT and Silty CLAY,

alternating 3/4"± clayey silt, 3/4"± silty clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Gray Clayey SILT, little(-) fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/2"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

.....(continued on next page).

S-11

S-12

S-13

U-NR

S-14

S-15

S-16

U-NR

0.8'

1.5'

1.2'

0.0'

0.9'

1.0'

2.0'

0.0'

40

75

60

0

45

50

100

0

100

-

PP

1.60

PP

1.00

-

PP

3.50

PP

1.50

PP

1.50

-

10

15

18

31

11

15

13

11

10

13

18

20

P

U

S

H

25

45

40

42

11

13

19

20

11

11

15

12

P

U

S

H

8

11

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler

Advanced 4" casing

to 29'

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler

EI. -21.7'

wet

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE: 3/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696835.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 76'

END 3/24/09

START 3/20/09

BORING NO. BW- 2

ELEVATION: 0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 3/24/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597675.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

24.0

26.0

27.0

29.0

31.0

32.0

34.0

36.0

37.0

39.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

ML

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/2"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Grayish brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

...frequent silt seams.

...occasional silt seams.

Brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt, alternating

1"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Brown Clayey SILT, trace(+) medium to fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

S-17

U-1

S-18

S-19

S-20

S-21

S-22

U-NR

S-23

2.0'

1.3'

2.0'

1.5'

2.0'

1.8'

2.0'

0.0'

2.0'

65

100

75

100

90

100

0

100

50

-

PP

0.40

PP

1.50

PP

N/A

PP

N/A

PP

1.00

PP

0.70

-

PP

0.90

PP

9

10

P

U

S

H

8

10

12

13

8

10

12

14

4

7

8

11

8

11

13

11

WR

WH

3

4

P

U

S

H

9

3

3

3

3

17

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler

.....(continued on

next page)

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE: 3/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696835.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 76'

END 3/24/09

START 3/20/09

BORING NO. BW- 2

ELEVATION: 0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 3/24/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597675.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

41.0

42.0

44.0

46.0

48.0

50.0

52.0

54.0

55.0

57.0

59.0
ML

ML

ML

ML

ML

ML

63.0'

71.0'

76.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown Clayey SILT, trace(+) medium to fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown SILT, some coarse to fine Sand, little(+)

medium to fine Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 71.0 feet.

Brown SILTSTONE, moderately to slightly weathered,

medium strong, very closely to closely spaced

fractures, (WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 76 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1/2x50 bags of bentonite, potable

water.

S-24

S-25

S-26

S-27

S-28

S-29

C-1

1.0'

2.0'

0.4'

0.8'

0.4'

1.0'

3.2'

100

20

40

48

55

63

18

0.40

PP

2.00

-

-

-

-

13

13

11

15

19

21

25

13

13

13

5

15

20

23

27

50/4"

25

37

44

50/4"

S-26: 61.2%<#200

EI. -62.7'

EI. -70.7'

EI. -75.7'

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE: 3/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696835.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 76'

END 3/24/09

START 3/20/09

BORING NO. BW- 2

ELEVATION: 0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 3/24/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597675.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

61.0

63.0

65.0

67.0

67.8

69.0

70.8

71.0

76.0
OL

OL

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP

SP

SP

SM

8.0'

Black Organic SILT, some Gravel, frequent plant

matter, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

...no Gravel, frequent decomposed plant matter.

Dark brown medium to fine(+) SAND, little(-) Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

...gray-brown, coarse to fine, trace fine Gravel, trace

Silt.

...brown-gray, some fine Gravel, little Silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

0.5'

0.7'

0.7'

1.0'

1.8'

1.0'

1.4'

1.7'

25

35

35

50

90

50

70

100

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

5

1

2

1

14

5

2

1

7

6

7

8

4

7

10

11

10

12

16

19

3

7

11

15

24

26

17

20

8

12

27

50/2"

Depth to mudline 1'

Drilled through soft

soils to 4'

S-5: 4.2%<#200

EI. -8.4'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/ M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696916.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 75'

END 3/19/09

START 3/17/09

BORING NO. BW- 4

ELEVATION: -0.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597950.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

19.7

20.0
SP

ML

CL-ML

CL

23.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray coarse(+) to fine SAND, some(+) fine Gravel,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray Clayey SILT, some fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...trace fine Sand.

Gray CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-9

S-10

S-11

S-12

1.8'

1.4'

1.4'

2.0'

90

70

70

100

-

-

PP

2.10

PP

1.80

10

13

23

24

11

18

23

29

14

17

20

25

16

18

18

20

Advanced 4" casing

to 25'

S-11: mc=23.6%

LL=23, PI=5

EI. -23.9'

wet

wet

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/ M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696916.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 75'

END 3/19/09

START 3/17/09

BORING NO. BW- 4

ELEVATION: -0.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597950.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/4"± silty clay, 1/8"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brown CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-13

S-14

S-15

S-16

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

PP

1.50

PP

1.00

-

-

17

17

19

22

11

15

13

11

10

10

11

8

25

15

6

8

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/ M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696916.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 75'

END 3/19/09

START 3/17/09

BORING NO. BW- 4

ELEVATION: -0.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597950.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
CL

CL

ML

65.0'

70.0'

75.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Red-brown SILT, some coarse to fine Gravel, some(-)

coarse to fine Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 70 feet.

Brown SILTSTONE, moderately weathered, medium

strong, very closely to moderately spaced fractures,

(WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 75 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 10 lbs of bentonite, potable water.

S-17

U-1

S-18

C-1

2.0'

2.0'

0.7'

4.2'

100

100

40

83

42

-

-

-

10

13

7

8

P

U

S

H

10

22

25

50/3"

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

EI. -65.4'

EI. -70.4'

EI. -75.4'

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/ M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696916.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 75'

END 3/19/09

START 3/17/09

BORING NO. BW- 4

ELEVATION: -0.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597950.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

63.0

65.0

66.8

70.0

75.0
OL

PT

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP

SP

8.0'

20.0'

Black Organic SILT, frequent roots, (ORGANIC

DEPOSIT).

Dark brown PEAT, occasional plant matter,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Brown medium to fine SAND, little(-) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...brownish gray, coarse to fine, trace(+) fine Gravel.

Brown-gray medium to fine SAND, (ALLUVIUM).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

0.5'

0.4'

1.4'

1.3'

1.4'

1.4'

1.5'

1.7'

25

21

70

63

70

70

75

84

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WH

WH

WH

WH

6

3

WH

WH

3

4

7

7

3

4

4

12

6

8

8

10

6

7

8

8

3

3

5

6

4

3

6

6

Drilled through soft

soils and advanced

4" casing to 4'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -8.5'

EI. -20.5'

wet

wet

moist

moist

moist

wet

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 3/6/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696772.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 70'

END 3/9/09

START 3/6/09

BORING NO. BW- 5

ELEVATION: -0.5±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME: 11:00

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 3/9/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598224.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

Light gray varved CLAY & SILT and Clayey SILT,

alternating 1/5"± clay & silt, 1/5"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Light gray varved CLAY & SILT and Silty CLAY,

alternating 1/8"± clay & silt, 1/8"± silty clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...brownish light gray, trace fine Sand.

.....(continued on next page).

S-9

S-10

U-1

S-11

S-12

1.8'

2.0'

1.0'

1.5'

2.0'

92

100

50

75

100

-

PP

2.00

PP

2.00

PP

1.50

PP

1.50

3

6

6

11

3

4

4

5

P

U

S

H

3

4

4

4

WH

2

2

3

PID = 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1: mc=30%

LL=30 and 48,

PI=10 and 26

99%<#200

Advanced 4" casing

to 30'

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 3/6/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696772.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 70'

END 3/9/09

START 3/6/09

BORING NO. BW- 5

ELEVATION: -0.5±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME: 11:00

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 3/9/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598224.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

60.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown varved Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brown SILT & CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brownish red Silty CLAY, little(-) fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

S-13

S-14

S-15

S-16

U-NR

2.0'

2.0'

0.8'

1.5'

100

100

38

75

PP

1.70

PP

1.00

PP

0.50

PP

1.50

-

WH

WH

1

2

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

4

5

3

2

P

U

S

H

S-14: mc=37.6%

LL=47, PI=28

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler

EI. -60.5'

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 3/6/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696772.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 70'

END 3/9/09

START 3/6/09

BORING NO. BW- 5

ELEVATION: -0.5±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME: 11:00

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 3/9/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598224.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

58.0

60.0
CL

65.0'

70.0'

Brownish red Silty CLAY, some(-) fine Gravel,

(GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 65 feet.

Red-brown MUDSTONE, moderately to slightly

weathered, medium strong, very closely to closely

spaced fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC

FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 70 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 1x50-lb bag of granular

bentonite, potable water

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

S-17

C-1

0.5'

4.7'

100

93

55

100/6" -

EI. -65.5'

EI. -70.5'

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 3/6/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696772.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 70'

END 3/9/09

START 3/6/09

BORING NO. BW- 5

ELEVATION: -0.5±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME: 11:00

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 3/9/09

REMARKS

TIME: 13:00

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598224.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

60.5

65.0

70.0
PT

SM

SM

SM

SM

SP

SP

CL

6.3'

17.5'

Black brown PEAT, occasional wood, (ORGANIC

DEPOSIT).

Light brown fine SAND, little Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...some Silt.

Dark brown coarse to fine SAND, trace(-) Silt, trace

fine Gravel, (ALLUVIUM).

Light gray Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

0.5'

1.3'

1.3'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

0.8'

1.7'

25

67

67

100

100

100

91

84

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

PP

1.50

WH

WH

WH

WH

2

2

3

7

8

26

19

30

22

17

28

24

24

20

26

27

21

22

20

32

42

100/5"

11

13

20

20

Depth to mudline 2'

Drilled through soft

soils to 4'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

S-6: 3.5%<#200

Advanced 4" casing

to 20'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -6.2'

EI. -17.4'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -2.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697059.7±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 76'

END 3/12/09

START 3/9/09

BORING NO. BW- 6

ELEVATION: 0.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 25.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598313.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

16.9

18.0

20.0
CL

ML

ML

ML

ML

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Light gray-brown varved Silty CLAY and Clayey SILT,

alternating 1/4"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Light gray Clayey SILT, trace fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Light gray varved Silty CLAY and Clayey SILT,

alternating 1/8"± silty clay, 1/8"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-9

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

S-16

S-17

S-18

1.2'

1.8'

1.0'

0.7'

1.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

59

92

50

34

50

100

100

100

100

100

PP

1.50

PP

1.00

PP

>4.5

PP

>4.5

PP

>4.5

PP

1.00

PP

1.50

PP

1.50

PP

1.75

PP

1.00

22

24

32

34

13

25

28

35

37

37

40

42

WH

WH

32

36

37

50

30

30

22

24

24

26

24

20

20

16

11

17

18

15

14

16

15

18

9

11

15

17

S-12: mc=18.9%

LL=23, PI=3

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -2.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697059.7±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 76'

END 3/12/09

START 3/9/09

BORING NO. BW- 6

ELEVATION: 0.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 25.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598313.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

34.0

36.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

60.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown varved Silty CLAY and Clayey SILT, alternating

1/8"± silty clay, 1/8"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/4"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

occasional fine sand seams.

No recovery.

Red-brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

...little(+) coarse to fine Sand.

S-19

S-20

S-21

S-22

S-23

U-NR

S-24

S-25

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.3'

100

100

100

100

100

100

67

-

-

-

-

-

-

PP

1.25

PP

1.50

11

14

12

10

10

12

15

17

9

10

12

15

10

19

13

16

WH

WH

6

6

P

U

S

H

5

11

8

12

5

16

22

26

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler

Advanced 4" casing

to 25'

EI. -59.9'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -2.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697059.7±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 76'

END 3/12/09

START 3/9/09

BORING NO. BW- 6

ELEVATION: 0.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 25.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598313.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

44.0

46.0

48.0

50.0

51.0

53.0

56.0

58.0

60.0
CL

CL

CL

ML

SP

71.0'

76.0'

Red-brown Silty CLAY, little coarse to fine Sand, trace

coarse to fine Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

...little coarse to fine Sand, trace fine Gravel.

Red-brown Clayey SILT, little coarse to fine Sand,

trace coarse to medium Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

Red-brown coarse to fine SAND, and coarse to fine

Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 71.0 feet.

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, moderately weathered,

medium strong, very closely to closely spaced

fractures, (WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 76 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 3x50-lb bags of

bentonite, potable water

S-26

S-27

S-28

S-29

S-30

C-1

0.5'

0.7'

1.0'

1.0'

0.8'

2.6'

25

34

50

50

40

52

47

PP

1.50

-

-

-

-

9

10

16

15

15

33

36

40

15

25

40

22

53

76

100/4"

8

28

20

21

Advanced 3" casing

to 76'

Hard drilling at 68'

to 71'

Advanced 3" casing

to 70'

Rotary bit refusal at

71'

EI. -70.9'

EI. -75.9'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -2.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697059.7±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 76'

END 3/12/09

START 3/9/09

BORING NO. BW- 6

ELEVATION: 0.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 25.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598313.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

64.0

66.0

68.0

70.0

71.0

76.0
OH

OH

SM

SP-SM

SP

SP-SM

4.0'

10.0'

20.0'

No recovery.

Black Organic SILT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Black Organic CLAY, frequent plant matter,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Bluish gray coarse to fine SAND, some(-) Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

...light gray, little(-) Silt.

Light brown medium to fine SAND, (ALLUVIUM).

Brown coarse to fine SAND, little(-) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

No recovery.

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

0.0'

0.2'

0.4'

0.8'

0.7'

0.5'

0.6'

0.0'

0

9

21

38

34

25

29

0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WR

WR

WR/4"

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

2

3

3

5

5

4

3

6

6

4

5

4

6

4

3

3

4

3

4

4

6

"O.G.Elevation"

refers to top of

temporary work

platform. Depth to

mudline is 4'

PID = 0.0 ppm

S-3: mc=94.8%

LL=89, PI=49

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 15'

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -4.2'

EI. -10.2'

EI. -20.2'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING:

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696930.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 80'

END 3/11/09

START 3/10/09

BORING NO. BW- 7

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 15.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598574.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

4.0

5.3

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL-ML

CL

CL

CL

CL

Grayish brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt & Clay,

little(-) fine Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Grayish brown SILT & CLAY varved with brown Clay &

Silt, trace (-) Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brownish gray SILT & CLAY varved with brown Clay &

Silt, alternating 1/8"± to 5/8"± silt & clay, 1/8"± clay &

silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brownish gray SILT & CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brownish gray varved Silty CLAY, 1/5"± varves,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-9

U-1

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

S-16

S-17

0.8'

1.0'

1.8'

0.7'

1.6'

1.5'

2.0'

1.8'

1.5'

2.0'

42

50

90

34

80

75

100

90

75

100

PP

1.50

PP

1.25

TV

0.15

PP

2.00

PP

0.05

PP

0.05

PP

0.05

PP

0.05

PP

1.50

PP

1.50

PP

1.50

2

3

2

1

P

U

S

H

1

1

1

2

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

PID = 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-1: mc=25%

LL=27 and 33, PI=7

and 15

98%<#200

S-13: mc=22.4%

LL=25%, PI=7%

99.2%<#200

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING:

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696930.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 80'

END 3/11/09

START 3/10/09

BORING NO. BW- 7

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 15.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598574.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

34.0

36.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown varved Silty CLAY, 1/2"± varves,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown varved SILT & CLAY, 1/2"± varves,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brown varved Silty CLAY and SILT & CLAY,

alternating 1/2"± silty clay, 1/2"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Light brown SILT & CLAY varved with dark brown

Clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Light brown SILT & CLAY varved with dark brown

Clay, alternating 1/16"± to 1/2"± silt & clay, 1/8"± to

1/4"± clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown SILT & CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Red-brown CLAY varved with Silt & Clay, alternating

1"± to 2"± clay, 1"± silt & clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-18

S-19

S-20

S-21

S-22

S-23

U-2

S-24

S-25

S-26

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

75

100

100

100

100

100

100

PP

1.50

PP

1.25

PP

1.25

PP

1.50

PP

0.75

PP

0.75

PP

1.00

TV

0.15

PP

0.75

PP

0.75

PP

0.50

2

3

3

4

3

4

3

3

2

3

5

4

3

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

P

U

S

H

2

3

3

2

3

2

1

1

1

1

WH

WH

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-2: mc=37%

LL=32 and 66,

PI=10 and 41

100%<#200

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING:

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696930.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 80'

END 3/11/09

START 3/10/09

BORING NO. BW- 7

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 15.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598574.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

44.0

46.0

48.0

50.0

52.0

54.0

56.0

58.0

60.0
CL

CL

CL

GP

68.0'

75.0'

80.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Red-brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, (GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 75.0 feet.

Red-brown MUDSTONE, moderately weathered,

medium strong, very closely to moderately spaced

fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC FORMATION).

S-27

S-28

S-29

S-30

S-31

C-1

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

0.0'

0.1'

5.0'

100

100

100

0

20

100

53

PP

0.50

PP

0.50

PP

0.50

-

-

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

100/6"

Rotary bit refusal at

75'

EI. -68.2'

EI. -75.2'

EI. -80.2'

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING:

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696930.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 80'

END 3/11/09

START 3/10/09

BORING NO. BW- 7

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 15.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598574.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

64.0

66.0

68.0

68.5

75.0

80.0
Bottom of borehole at 80 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 3x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 3/4x50-lb bag of bentonite, potable

water

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING:

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696930.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY L. Ramos/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 80'

END 3/11/09

START 3/10/09

BORING NO. BW- 7

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 15.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Salerno (off Amtrak ROW)

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598574.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:
OL

OL

PT

SM

SP-SM

SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

ML

ML

6.0'

18.0'

Dark brown Organic SILT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Brown fibrous PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Light brown fine SAND, little Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...green-brown coarse to fine, little(-) Silt.

...yellow-brown medium to fine, some(-) Silt.

Gray-brown coarse to fine SAND, little(-) Silt, trace(-)

fine Gravel, (ALLUVIUM).

...trace Silt.

Gray SILT, below 16.6', (ALLUVIUM).

Gray and red-brown varved Clayey SILT, 1/8"± varves,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8A

S-8B

S-9

0.0'

0.0'

1.1'

1.7'

1.1'

2.0'

2.0'

1.3'

1.0'

0

0

55

85

55

100

100

65

50

-

-

PP

<0.25

-

-

-

-

-

-

- PP

2.25

PP

3.25

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

0

1

0

1

6

12

17

14

4

7

7

12

6

5

6

12

4

6

9

12

4

5

14

16

12

13

15

19

Depth to mudline 1'

PID = 0.0 ppm

S-3: mc=402.0%

Non-plastic

Logged from drill

cuttings from 6' to 8'

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 10'

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 13'

Bentonite

introduced at 16'

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -6.3'

EI. -18.3'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697163.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 90.5'

END 3/4/09

START 2/19/09

BORING NO. BW- 8

ELEVATION: -0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 23.0"/84.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598549.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
ML

CL-ML

CL-ML

CL-ML

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray varved SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Clayey SILT varved with Silt & Clay,

alternating 3/8"± clayey silt, 1/4"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/4"± silty clay, 1/10"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-10

U-1

S-11

S-12

S-13

0.7'

1.1'

1.5'

1.1'

1.2'

35

72

75

55

60

PP

1.75

-

PP

1.50

PP

3.25

PP

0.75

6

8

9

17

P

U

S

H

11

17

21

28

10

10

19

19

3

5

7

9

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube,

advanced 18"

U-1: mc=26%

LL=26 and 28, PI=4

and 6

99%<#200

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697163.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 90.5'

END 3/4/09

START 2/19/09

BORING NO. BW- 8

ELEVATION: -0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 23.0"/84.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598549.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

23.0

24.5

26.5

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/4"± to 1/3"± silty clay, 1/8"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/3"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt.

Brown varved CLAY & SILT and Silty CLAY,

alternating 1/8"± clay & silt, silty clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/2"± to 1"± silty clay, 1/6"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-14

S-15

S-16

U-2

S-17

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.8'

2.0'

100

100

100

92

100

PP

1.00

PP

1.00

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

TV

<0.05

PP

0.75

3

10

10

10

2

2

4

5

WH

WH

WH

WH

P

U

S

H

WR

WR

WH

5

Advanced 4" casing

to 23'

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc=35%

LL=34 and 61,

PI=13 and 36

98%<#200

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697163.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 90.5'

END 3/4/09

START 2/19/09

BORING NO. BW- 8

ELEVATION: -0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 23.0"/84.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598549.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

53.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
SP-SM

ML

ML

GP

61.2'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown coarse to medium SAND, little Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Clayey SILT, some coarse to fine Sand,

some(-) coarse to fine Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

...some medium to fine Gravel.

No recovery.

...BOULDER at 70.1' to 71.5'.

Red-brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, some coarse to

medium Sand, trace(-) Silt, (GLACIAL TILL).

.....(continued on next page).

S-18A

S-18B

S-19

S-20

S-21

2.0'

2.0'

0.0'

0.3'

100

100

0

100

-

- PP

1.25

-

-

-

WR

4

13

19

5

6

11

14

100/1"

100/3"

Fluid loss at 60'

Advanced 3" casing

to 65'

S-19: mc=13.5%

44.6%<#200

Hard drilling at 70'

to 80'

Possible boulder at

79' to 80'

EI. -61.5'

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697163.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 90.5'

END 3/4/09

START 2/19/09

BORING NO. BW- 8

ELEVATION: -0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 23.0"/84.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598549.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

65.0

67.0

70.0

70.1

75.0

75.3

80.0
GM

ML

82.5'

85.5'

90.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, (siltstone

fragments), some coarse to medium Sand, trace(-)

Silt, (GLACIAL TILL).

No recovery.

Red-brown Clayey SILT, and medium to fine Gravel,

(DECOMPOSED ROCK).

Top of Rock at 85.5 feet.

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, moderately to slightly

weathered, medium strong to strong, very closely to

moderately spaced fractures, (COMPETENT

PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 90.5 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 3x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1x50-lb bag of bentonite, potable

water

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

S-22

C-1

S-23

C-2

0.1'

0.0'

0.1'

3.7'

33

0

33

73

53

-

-

-

65/3"

50/4"

Advanced 3" casing

to 65'

Advanced 3" casing

to 84'

Loss of circulaton at

85'

EI. -82.8'

EI. -85.8'

EI. -90.8'

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697163.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 90.5'

END 3/4/09

START 2/19/09

BORING NO. BW- 8

ELEVATION: -0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 23.0"/84.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598549.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

80.3

80.5

82.5

85.0

85.3

85.5

90.5
SP-SM

GP-GM

PT

PT

SM

SM

SP-SM

SP

SP

SP

6.0'

9.0'

Dark brown coarse to fine SAND, some coarse to fine

Gravel, trace(+) Silt, occasional cobbles, brick

fragments, (FILL).

Dark brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, little(+) coarse to

fine Sand, trace Silt, occasional ash, cinders, (FILL).

Black PEAT, trace(-) medium to fine Sand,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Dark gray fine SAND, and(-) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...little(-) Silt.

Grayish brown medium to fine SAND, trace(-) Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

G-1

S-1

S-2

U-1

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

0.7'

0.3'

2.0'

0.8'

0.8'

1.0'

1.2'

1.0'

34

17

100

38

42

50

59

50

-

-

PP

<0.25

TV

<0.05

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

5

8

9

7

3

2

1

1

P

U

S

H

1

5

5

7

3

6

6

7

3

5

5

6

2

2

8

13

8

14

15

17

Hand augered to 4'

Used automatic

hammer at 4' to 10'

bgs

Bentonite

introduced at 4'

Advanced 4" casing

to 6'

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1 (PT): mc=342%

LL=174, PI=93

U-1(SM):39%<#200

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 15'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -1.6'

EI. -4.6'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Clavel/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 12.5'

DATE: 3/4/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697085.9±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Zambardi/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 3/6/09

START 3/4/09

BORING NO. BW- 9

ELEVATION: 4.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Town of Kearny/USPS

TIME: 8:23

TIME: 11:50 DATE: 3/6/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598925.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
SP-SM

ML

ML

CL

CL

CL

33.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Grayish brown medium to fine SAND, trace Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray SILT, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray Clayey SILT, trace(-) fine Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray SILT & CLAY, (ALLUVIUM).

Brown varved CLAY & SILT and Silty CLAY,

alternating 1/2" to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/2" to 1/4"± silty

clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/8"± clay & silt, 1/8"± silty clay.

.....(continued on next page).

S-8

S-9

S-10

U-2

S-11

1.5'

0.3'

0.3'

1.0'

1.8'

75

17

17

50

92

-

-

-

-

-

PP

1.25

TV

0.50

PP

1.25

3

9

8

9

10

15

12

15

16

23

23

20

P

U

S

H

6

6

9

9

PID = 0.0 ppm

No pocket

penetrometer test

performed from S-8

to S-9 due to

sample adhering to

walls of split spoon

S-10: mc=26.2%

LL=26, PI=8

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc=29%

LL=31 and 40,

PI=10 and 20

98%<#200

EI. -29.1'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Clavel/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 12.5'

DATE: 3/4/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697085.9±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Zambardi/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 3/6/09

START 3/4/09

BORING NO. BW- 9

ELEVATION: 4.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Town of Kearny/USPS

TIME: 8:23

TIME: 11:50 DATE: 3/6/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598925.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

39.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Brown and gray varved Silty CLAY, 1/8"± varves,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...3/16"± varves.

...red-brown, 1/8"± varves.

.....(continued on next page).

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

1.8'

1.8'

1.8'

1.8'

92

92

92

92

PP

1.50

PP

1.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

4

6

6

8

2

3

4

5

WH

WH

1

3

WH

WH

WH

2

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Clavel/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 12.5'

DATE: 3/4/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697085.9±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Zambardi/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 3/6/09

START 3/4/09

BORING NO. BW- 9

ELEVATION: 4.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Town of Kearny/USPS

TIME: 8:23

TIME: 11:50 DATE: 3/6/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598925.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL-ML

GP 76.0'

80.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown CLAY & SILT varved with Clay, alternating

3/8"± clay & silt, 1/4"± clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Red-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Clay, trace fine

Sand, alternating 3/8"± clay & silt, 1/4"± clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown varved Silty CLAY and SILT & CLAY,

alternating 5/8"± silt & clay, 5/8"± silty clay, occasional

6" silt layers, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Clayey SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Red-brown coarse GRAVEL, (GLACIAL TILL).

S-16

U-3

S-17

S-18

S-19

1.8'

0.8'

1.8'

1.8'

1.2'

92

38

92

92

96

PP

<0.25

PP

1.00

TV

0.35

PP

1.00

PP

1.65

-

-

-

WH

WH

WH

3

P

U

S

H

3

4

10

8

7

13

14

8

5

10

70/3"

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-3: mc=45%

LL=33 and 70,

PI=11 and 40

98%<#200

S-19: mc=21.0%

LL=21, PI=5

Drill rig chattering

from 77' to 80'

Fluid loss at 77' to

80'

EI. -71.6'

EI. -75.6'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Clavel/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 12.5'

DATE: 3/4/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697085.9±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Zambardi/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 3/6/09

START 3/4/09

BORING NO. BW- 9

ELEVATION: 4.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Town of Kearny/USPS

TIME: 8:23

TIME: 11:50 DATE: 3/6/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598925.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

65.0

67.0

69.0

70.0

72.0

75.0

76.3

80.0
85.0'

Top of Rock at 80.0 feet.

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, moderately to slightly

weathered, medium strong, closely to moderately

spaced fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC

FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 85 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 1x94-lb bag of portland

cement, 1x50-lb bag of bentonite, potable water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

3. Temporary well installed 2' east of boring BW-9 to

10'.

C-1

C-2

2.5'

2.5'

100

90

100

80

Advanced 4" casing

to 30'

Core barrel clogged

at 82.5'

Depth to water in

temporary well: 3.0'

bgs on 3-9-09 at

7:45 am

EI. -80.6'

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Clavel/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 12.5'

DATE: 3/4/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697085.9±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Zambardi/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 3/6/09

START 3/4/09

BORING NO. BW- 9

ELEVATION: 4.4±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Town of Kearny/USPS

TIME: 8:23

TIME: 11:50 DATE: 3/6/09

REMARKS

TIME: 11:50

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598925.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

82.5

85.0
OL

OL

OL

SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

ML

ML

8.0'

16.0'

Black Organic SILT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray medium to fine(+) SAND, some Organic Silt,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray coarse to fine SAND, little(-) Silt, trace(-) fine

Gravel, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray varved SILT and Silty CLAY, alternating 1/16"±

silt, 1/16"± silty clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

0.5'

1.0'

2.0'

1.0'

1.5'

1.5'

1.0'

75

100

100

25

50

100

50

75

75

50

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

PP

1.20

PP

2.20

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WH

WH

2

3

9

16

24

21

7

16

18

21

9

11

13

14

9

13

11

9

9

13

18

23

7

16

20

22

Depth to mudline 1'

S-5: mc=18.6%

10.3%<#200

EI. -8.2'

EI. -16.2'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697253.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 82'

END 4/1/09

START 3/27/09

BORING NO. BW- 10

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598756.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
ML

ML

ML

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown SILT varved with Silty Clay, alternating

3/4"± silt, 1/4"± silty clay, with 6"± layer of gray

medium to fine gravel, and silty clay at 20',

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...brown-gray, alternating 1/2"± silt, 1/4"± silty clay.

Gray Clayey SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray SILT & CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray Silty CLAY varved with Silt, alternating 1/4"± silty

clay, 1/16"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray Silty CLAY varved with Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-11A

S-11B

S-12

U-1

S-13

S-14

S-15

S-16

S-17

U-2

1.9'

2.0'

1.5'

1.0'

1.0'

1.2'

2.0'

2.0'

1.1'

95

100

75

50

50

60

100

100

55

PP

2.00

- PP

1.50

PP

1.70

PP

2.60

PP

3.50

PP

2.50

PP

NA

PP

1.50

PP

1.00

7

13

16

21

12

16

18

19

P

U

S

H

12

14

15

21

13

18

26

29

10

14

21

22

10

12

18

20

8

12

13

12

P

U

S

H

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697253.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 82'

END 4/1/09

START 3/27/09

BORING NO. BW- 10

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598756.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

24.0

25.0

27.0

29.0

31.0

33.0

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray Silty CLAY varved with Silt, alternating 1/4"± silty

clay, 1/16"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...grayish brown.

...alternating 1/4"± silty clay, 1/8"± silt.

...alternating 1/2"± silty clay, 1/4"± silt.

...grayish brown, alternating 1/2"± silty clay, 1/4"± silt,

with 6"± layer of brown fine sand, some clayey silt.

Brown CLAY & SILT, occasional silt seams,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...with 4"± layer of red-brown fine sand, and silty clay.

.....(continued on next page).

S-18

S-19

S-20

S-21

S-22

S-23

S-24

S-25

S-26

S-27

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.7'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

85

100

100

PP

1.00

PP

1.00

PP

0.60

PP

0.60

PP

0.40

PP

0.40

PP

1.00

PP

0.80

PP

1.00

PP

0.80

7

7

8

10

9

12

13

13

5

7

8

9

5

6

6

6

7

8

9

10

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

3

7

7

13

10

10

14

5

7

10

12

14

20

24

27

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697253.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 82'

END 4/1/09

START 3/27/09

BORING NO. BW- 10

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598756.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

44.0

46.0

48.0

50.0

52.0

54.0

56.0

58.0

60.0
CL

CL

ML

ML

ML

ML

ML

ML

71.0'

77.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Grayish brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt, alternating

1/2"± silty clay, 1/4"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Clayey SILT, some fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Clayey SILT, some(-) coarse to fine Sand,

little(+) coarse to fine Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

Red-brown Silt, some(+) coarse to fine Gravel,

some(-) coarse to fine Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 77 feet.

Brown SILTSTONE, slightly weathered, medium

strong, very closely to moderately spaced fractures,

(COMPETENT PASSAIC FORMATION).

.....(continued on next page).

S-28

U-3

S-29

S-30

S-31

S-32

S-33

S-34

C-1

2.0'

1.8'

0.8'

2.0'

1.5'

1.8'

2.0'

0.5'

4.2'

100

90

40

100

75

90

100

54

83

PP

0.50

-

-

-

PP

1.50

-

-

-

WH

WH

WH

WH

P

U

S

H

WH

WH

WH

WH

4

7

10

12

14

16

21

24

7

12

13

12

15

40

28

37

15

50/5"

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

EI. -71.2'

EI. -77.2'

moist

moist

wet

moist

moist

moist

moist

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697253.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 82'

END 4/1/09

START 3/27/09

BORING NO. BW- 10

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598756.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

63.0

65.0

67.0

69.0

71.0

73.0

75.0

75.9

77.0
82.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown SILTSTONE, slightly weathered, medium

strong, very closely to moderately spaced fractures,

(COMPETENT PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 82 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 3x94-lb bags of

portland cement, potable water.

70 EI. -82.2'

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.0'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697253.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 82'

END 4/1/09

START 3/27/09

BORING NO. BW- 10

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598756.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

82.0
GM

SM

SM

PT

PT

OL

PT

SM

ML

ML

SM

SP-SM

8.0'

11.4'

Dark brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, some coarse to

medium Sand, little Clayey Silt, (FILL).

...medium to fine, some(-) coarse to medium Sand,

some Clayey Silt.

Black coarse to fine SAND, some(-) medium to fine

Gravel, little Silt, (FILL).

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Organic SILT, and(+) medium to fine

Sand, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown fine SAND, some(-) Silt, occasional roots,

(ALLUVIUM).

Greenish brown Clayey SILT, some fine Sand,

occasional fibers, (ALLUVIUM).

...little medium to fine Sand, trace fine Gravel,

occasional roots.

Gray-brown coarse(+) to fine SAND, little(+) Silt, trace

fine Gravel, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3A

S-3B

U-1

S-4A

S-4B

S-5

S-6

S-7

0.3'

1.7'

1.5'

1.7'

2.0'

1.7'

2.0'

2.0'

15

85

75

85

100

85

100

100

75

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

46

7

20

16

16

7

8

5

4

2

1

1

P

U

S

H

5

4

7

6

1

1

1

2

WH

1

4

5

5

10

12

14

4

5

Hand augered to 3'

PID= 0.0 ppm

PID= 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 5'

PID= 0.3 ppm

(VOCs)

PID= 0.0 ppm

PID= 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-1: mc=26%

Non-plastic fines

52.2%<#200

Advanced 4" casing

to 10'

PID= 0.0 ppm

PID= 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 15'

S-7: mc=16.2%

17.6%<#200

PID= 0.0 ppm

EI. -3.1'

EI. -6.5'

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 12/29/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697216.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 12/30/08

START 12/29/08

BORING NO. BW- 11

ELEVATION: 4.9±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 9:30

TIME: 7:15 DATE: 12/30/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599242.0±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

3.0

5.0

7.0

9.0

11.0

13.0

15.0

17.0

19.0
SP-SM

ML

ML

SP-SM

ML

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

25.7'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown medium(+) to fine SAND, trace(+) Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown Clayey SILT, trace fine Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown coarse to medium SAND, trace Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown Clayey SILT, trace fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown SILT & CLAY, trace(-) fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown SILT & CLAY varved with Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/6"± silt & clay, 1/10"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/8"± to 3/8"± silty clay, 1/16"± to 1/8"±

clayey silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-8

S-9A

S-9B

S-10

S-11A

S-11B

S-12

S-13

U-2

S-14

S-15

S-16

1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

100

75

100

100

100

100

-

- PP

2.00

- PP

2.13

-

- PP

2.25

PP

1.88

PP

2.00

TV

0.65

PP

2.25

PP

2.25

PP

1.00

PP

7

11

5

7

8

9

5

5

6

11

6

8

15

14

5

7

8

8

5

9

10

13

P

U

S

H

5

8

10

10

11

9

10

12

2

3

4

3

1

1

Advanced 4" casing

to 20'

PID= 0.0 ppm

S-12: mc=26.8%

LL=28, PI=9

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-2: mc=27%

LL=26 and 37,

PI=6 and 16

97.8%<#200

EI. -20.8'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 12/29/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697216.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 12/30/08

START 12/29/08

BORING NO. BW- 11

ELEVATION: 4.9±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 9:30

TIME: 7:15 DATE: 12/30/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599242.0±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

21.0

23.0

25.0

27.0

29.0

31.0

33.0

35.0

37.0

39.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/4"± to 5/8"± silty clay, 1/16"± to 1/8"±

clayey silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/2"± to 3/4"± silty clay, 1/16"± to 1/8"±

clayey silt.

...alternating 1/4"± to 5/8"± silty clay, 1/16"± to 3/8"±

clayey silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-17

S-18

S-19

S-20

S-21

S-22

S-23

S-24

S-25

S-26

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.0'

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

50

100

1.00

PP

0.63

PP

0.50

PP

0.63

PP

0.50

PP

0.50

PP

0.63

PP

0.50

PP

0.50

PP

0.63

PP

2

3

2

2

3

4

2

2

2

2

WH

3

3

5

WH

WH

3

3

WH

1

1

1

3

3

4

3

WH

WH

3

3

WH

WH

2

4

2

3

3

5

2

2

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 12/29/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697216.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 12/30/08

START 12/29/08

BORING NO. BW- 11

ELEVATION: 4.9±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 9:30

TIME: 7:15 DATE: 12/30/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599242.0±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

41.0

43.0

45.0

47.0

49.0

51.0

53.0

55.0

57.0

59.0
CL

CH

CH

CH

CL

CL

GC

GC

CL

CL

71.0'

80.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt & Clay,

alternating 1/3"± silty clay, 1/16"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/8"± to 1/2"± silty clay, 1/16"± to 1/8"±

clayey silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown CLAY & SILT, some medium to fine

Gravel, some(-) coarse to fine Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

Red-brown ...little(+) coarse to fine Gravel (claystone

fragments).

Top of Rock at 80 feet.

S-27

U-3

S-28

S-29

S-30

S-31

S-32

S-33

S-34

S-35

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.0'

1.5'

1.5'

0.2'

100

100

100

100

100

50

75

88

22

0.50

TV

0.73

PP

0.50

PP

0.38

PP

0.25

PP

0.63

-

-

-

-

2

3

P

U

S

H

WH

1

2

2

WH

WH

WH

3

WH

WH

1

3

3

5

4

4

5

6

6

7

6

12

27

24

33

69

47

100/2"

100/5"

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-3: mc=37%

LL=26 and 55,

PI=6 and 34

100%<#200

S-31: mc=12.4%

LL=38, PI=20

EI. -66.1'

EI. -75.1'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 12/29/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697216.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 12/30/08

START 12/29/08

BORING NO. BW- 11

ELEVATION: 4.9±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 9:30

TIME: 7:15 DATE: 12/30/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599242.0±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

61.0

63.0

65.0

67.0

69.0

71.0

73.0

75.0

76.7

77.0

77.9

80.0
85.0'

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, moderately to slightly

weathered, medium strong, very closely to closely

spaced fractures, (WEATHERED PASSAIC

FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 85 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, bentonite, potable water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

C-1 5.0'

100

42 EI. -80.1'

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 12/29/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697216.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 12/30/08

START 12/29/08

BORING NO. BW- 11

ELEVATION: 4.9±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 9:30

TIME: 7:15 DATE: 12/30/08

REMARKS

TIME: 7:15

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599242.0±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

85.0
OL

OL

SM

SP-SM

CL-ML

CL-ML

SP-SM

10.0'

Black Organic SILT, frequent plant roots, (ORGANIC

DEPOSIT).

...dark brown-gray, little fine Sand.

Gray fine SAND, some Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...little(-) Silt.

Gray SILT & CLAY, little(+) fine Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray medium to fine SAND, little(-) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

0.3'

0.3'

1.5'

0.5'

2.0'

1.0'

1.5'

15

15

75

25

100

50

75

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WR

WR

WR

WR

WH

WH

1

2

3

5

6

9

10

13

16

19

4

7

9

9

14

18

18

21

12

18

21

23

Depth to mudline 0'

Drilled through soft

soils and advanced

4" casing to 6'

S-5: mc=21.9%

LL=21, PI=6

70.8%<#200

EI. -10.2'

wet

wet

wet

wet

moist

moist

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/8/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697461.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 4/8/09

START 4/7/09

BORING NO. BW- 12

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/8/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599228.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
SP-SM

CL

CL-ML

CL

CL

23.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray medium to fine SAND, little(-) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray Silty CLAY varved with brown Silt, alternating

1/2"± silty clay, 1/8"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray SILT & CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray Silty CLAY varved with brown Silt, alternating

1/2"± silty clay, 1/8"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray Silty CLAY varved with brown Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-8

S-9

S-10

S-11

U-1

1.0'

1.4'

1.0'

2.0'

1.8'

50

70

75

100

90

-

PP

1.80

PP

3.50

PP

0.80

TV

0.45

7

13

19

27

10

18

23

27

25

35

50/4"

7

9

11

15

P

U

S

H

Advanced 4" casing

to 29'

S-10: mc=20.1%

LL=24, PI=6

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

EI. -23.7'

wet

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/8/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697461.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 4/8/09

START 4/7/09

BORING NO. BW- 12

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/8/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599228.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

31.3

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray Silty CLAY varved with brown Silt, alternating

1/2"± silty clay, 1/8"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brown CLAY & SILT, with 1"± fine sand layer,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

-

-

PP

1.20

PP

1.30

11

13

14

18

9

10

11

12

8

10

13

14

5

8

12

20

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/8/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697461.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 4/8/09

START 4/7/09

BORING NO. BW- 12

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/8/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599228.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
CL

CL

CL

GM

73.5'

80.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown CLAY & SILT, with 1.5"± fine sand layer,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Brown varved Silty CLAY and Clayey SILT, alternating

1/4"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, some(+) Clayey Silt,

little coarse to fine Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

S-16

S-17

U-NR

S-18

S-19

1.0'

2.0'

0.0'

2.0'

0.5'

50

100

0

100

38

-

TV

0.08

-

-

-

6

17

25

27

12

11

8

12

P

U

S

H

8

10

15

15

9

28

50/4"

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler

Rotary bit refusal at

79'

EI. -73.7'

EI. -80.2'

moist

moist

moist

moist

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/8/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697461.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 4/8/09

START 4/7/09

BORING NO. BW- 12

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/8/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599228.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

65.0

67.0

68.0

70.0

72.0

75.0

76.3

80.0
85.0'

Top of Rock at 80.0 feet.

Brown MUDSTONE, moderately weathered, medium

strong, extremely closely to closely spaced fractures,

(WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 85 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, potable water.

C-1 4.3'

85

50 EI. -85.2'

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY M. Tekin/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/8/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697461.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 85'

END 4/8/09

START 4/7/09

BORING NO. BW- 12

ELEVATION: -0.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/8/09

REMARKS

TIME: 13:00

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599228.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

85.0
GM

ML

PT

PT

SM

SM

ML

SM

8.0'

11.0'

Dark brown and gray coarse to fine Gravel, some

coarse to fine Sand, some Silt, (FILL).

...red-brown and brown, and coarse to fine Sand,

some Silt.

Red-brown, dark brown, and dark gray Silt, and

medium to fine Sand, little coarse to fine Gravel,

(FILL).

Brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Bluish gray coarse to fine SAND, some(-) Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Greenish gray medium to fine SAND, some(+) Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Dark greenish brown SILT, and(+) medium to fine

Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

Brown coarse to fine SAND, and Silt, trace fine Gravel,

frequent 1"± silt layers, (ALLUVIUM).

No recovery.

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

U-1

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

0.5'

1.1'

1.0'

1.9'

1.4'

1.2'

1.6'

0.0'

25

55

50

95

70

60

80

0

-

-

-

-

-

-

PP

0.75

-

-

5

2

8

20

12

7

9

23

WH

WH

1

WH

P

U

S

H

4

3

5

3

3

4

4

4

7

9

8

10

2

9

12

16

Hand augered to 4'

PID=0.0 ppm

PID=0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 8'

PID=0.0 ppm

PID=0.0 ppm

Bentonite

introduced at 6'

PID=0.0 ppm

Organic odor

PID=0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

PID=0.0 ppm

PID=0.0 ppm

PID=0.0 ppm

S-6: mc=17.6%

43.5%<#200

EI. -2.8'

EI. -5.8'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/30/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697330.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Kurzynowski/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89.5'

END 12/31/08

START 12/30/08

BORING NO. BW- 13

ELEVATION: 5.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 8.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:50 DATE: 12/31/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599472.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
SM

CL

CL

23.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Brownish gray coarse to fine SAND, little(+) Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Brown and gray SILT & CLAY, trace(-) fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown and dark gray varved CLAY & SILT, 1/5"±

varves, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

.....(continued on next page).

S-8

S-9

S-10

S-11

1.5'

1.8'

1.6'

0.0'

75

90

80

0

-

PP

2.00

PP

2.25

-

8

9

10

10

8

9

10

10

5

8

8

11

4

4

6

7

PID=0.0 ppm

S-9: mc=29.1%

LL=29, PI=9

98.7%<#200

EI. -18.3'

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/30/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697330.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Kurzynowski/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89.5'

END 12/31/08

START 12/30/08

BORING NO. BW- 13

ELEVATION: 5.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 8.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:50 DATE: 12/31/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599472.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Dark gray varved Clayey SILT and Silty CLAY,

alternating 1/8"± clayey silt, 1/8"± silty clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...1/5"± varves, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Dark grayish brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/4"± to 1/2"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown varved Silty CLAY and Clayey SILT, alternating

1/4"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt, alternating

1/2"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

U-2

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

1.8'

1.8'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

90

90

100

100

100

PP

1.25

TV

0.15

PP

1.75

PP

1.25

PP

0.75

PP

0.75

P

U

S

H

1

4

5

5

WH

2

3

5

WH

WH

1

1

WR

WR

WR

WR

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-2: mc=33%

LL=34 and 46, PI=3

and 26

100%<#200

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/30/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697330.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Kurzynowski/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89.5'

END 12/31/08

START 12/30/08

BORING NO. BW- 13

ELEVATION: 5.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 8.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:50 DATE: 12/31/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599472.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

44.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

78.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1"± silty clay, 1/8"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1"± to 1.5"± silty clay, 3/4"± to 1"± clayey

silt.

Red-brown varved SILT & CLAY and Silty CLAY,

alternating 1/4"± silt & clay, 1/4"± silty clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1"± to 2"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-16

S-17

U-3

S-18

S-19

2.0'

2.0'

1.9'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

95

100

100

PP

<0.5

PP

<0.5

PP

<0.5

PP

<0.5

PP

<0.5

WH

WH

WH

WH

WR

WR

WR

WR

P

U

S

H

WH

WH

2

1

WR

WR

WR

WR

S-16: mc=45%

LL=40, PI=22

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-3: mc=41%

LL=28 and 56

PI=6 and 34

EI. -73.3'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/30/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697330.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Kurzynowski/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89.5'

END 12/31/08

START 12/30/08

BORING NO. BW- 13

ELEVATION: 5.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 8.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:50 DATE: 12/31/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599472.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

65.0

67.0

70.0

72.0

74.0

75.0

77.0

80.0
ML

GM

83.5'

85.5'

89.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown Clayey SILT, some(-) medium to fine

Gravel, trace medium to fine Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

Red-brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, and Clayey Silt,

(claystone and siltstone fragments), (DECOMPOSED

ROCK).

Top of Rock at 85.5 feet.

Red-brown and light gray CLAYSTONE, moderately

weathered, medium strong, very closely spaced

fractures, (WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 89.5 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement,1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, potable

water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

S-20

S-21

C-1

2.0'

0.2'

2.8'

100

100

69

25

-

-

8

5

5

9

50/3"

Depth to water 5.5'

on 12/31/08 at 7:45

am

EI. -78.3'

EI. -80.3'

EI. -84.3'

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/30/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697330.2±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY J. Kurzynowski/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89.5'

END 12/31/08

START 12/30/08

BORING NO. BW- 13

ELEVATION: 5.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 8.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:50 DATE: 12/31/08

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599472.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

82.0

85.0

85.2

85.5

89.5
OL

ML

SM

SM

SM

SM

ML

ML

6.0'

No recovery.

Dark brown Organic SILT, frequent plant matter,

roots, wood, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Grayish brown SILT, and fine Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

Brown fine SAND, some(-) Silt, occasional plant

matter, (ALLUVIUM).

Brown coarse to fine SAND, little Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...some(-) Silt.

Brown fine SAND, some(-) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Brown SILT, and fine Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

0.0'

0.1'

0.0'

1.2'

1.6'

2.0'

1.2'

2.0'

1.4'

1.5'

0

5

0

60

80

100

60

100

70

75

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WH

WH

WH

WH

WR

WR

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

3

3

2

4

5

5

5

5

8

6

WH

WH

2

3

5

5

6

6

1

2

4

2

2

7

10

10

PID = 0.0 ppm

Organic material

observed at ground

surface (marsh)

PID=0.0 ppm

Advanced 5" casing

to 5'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID=0.0 ppm<

Advanced 5" casing

to 8'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 5" casing

to 13'

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 5" casing

to 18'

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -3.9'

moist

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Hernandez/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/16/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697581.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 99'

END 4/17/09

START 4/16/09

BORING NO. BW- 14/CHS-1

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 23.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 4/17/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599514.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
ML

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

22.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown Clayey SILT, some fine Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

Brown varved Clayey SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brown varved Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brown Clayey SILT varved with Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...1/4"± varves.

.....(continued on next page).

S-11

S-12

S-13

U-NR/

G-1

S-14

U-1

S-15

S-16

S-17

1.5'

1.6'

1.7'

0.3'

2.0'

1.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

75

80

85

15

100

50

100

100

100

PP

1.00

PP

1.25

PP

3.50

PP

3.00

TV

0.45

PP

1.75

-

PP

1.25

PP

0.75

PP

1.25

5

7

7

5

5

7

10

8

4

6

8

8

P

U

S

H

4

4

6

6

P

U

S

H

3

4

6

5

3

3

5

4

4

6

6

5

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 5" casing

to 23'

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a Shelby tube:

insufficient

recovery, sample

collected in jar G-1

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-1: mc=28%

EI. -19.9'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Hernandez/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/16/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697581.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 99'

END 4/17/09

START 4/16/09

BORING NO. BW- 14/CHS-1

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 23.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 4/17/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599514.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

24.0

26.0

27.0

29.0

31.0

32.0

34.0

36.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Brown varved Silty CLAY and SILT & CLAY,

alternating 1/4"± to 1/3"± silty clay, silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown varved Silty CLAY and Clayey SILT,

alternating 1/4"± to 1/2"± clayey silt, 1/4"± silty clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY varved with Clay & Silt, alternating

3/4"± silty clay, 1/4"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown varved Silty CLAY and CLAY & SILT,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-18

S-19

S-20

S-21

S-22

S-23

S-24

S-25

U-2

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

PP

1.25

PP

1.25

PP

1.25

PP

<0.1

PP

0.50

PP

<0.1

PP

0.75

PP

0.25

PP

0.50

TV

0.40

PP

2

2

4

2

3

3

4

4

2

2

3

2

WH

2

4

3

WH

WH

1

2

WR

WH

2

2

WR

WR

WH

WH

WR

WR

WH

WH

P

U

S

H

WR

WR

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-2: mc=38%

LL=32 and 42,

PI=13 and23

100%<#200

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Hernandez/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/16/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697581.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 99'

END 4/17/09

START 4/16/09

BORING NO. BW- 14/CHS-1

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 23.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 4/17/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599514.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

44.0

46.0

48.0

50.0

52.0

54.0

56.0

57.0

59.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

...occasional fine sand seams.

Brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt & Clay, alternating

3/4"± silty clay, 1/4"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt & Clay, alternating

3/4"± silty clay, 1/4"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Silty CLAY, trace(-) fine Gravel, trace(-)

coarse to fine Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-26

S-27

S-28

S-29

S-30

S-31

S-32

U-3

S-33

S-34

2.0'

2.0'

1.3'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.8'

100

65

100

100

100

100

100

90

<0.25

PP

<0.1

PP

<0.1

PP

0.50

PP

<0.1

PP

<0.1

PP

0.25

PP

0.25

TV

0.20

PP

1.50

PP

<0.1

WH

WH

WR

WH

2

5

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WH

WH

WH

WH

2

2

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WH

3

4

P

U

S

H

WR

1

3

6

WH

2

6

5

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-3: mc=32%

LL=26 and 39, PI=7

and 22

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Hernandez/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/16/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697581.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 99'

END 4/17/09

START 4/16/09

BORING NO. BW- 14/CHS-1

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 23.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 4/17/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599514.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

61.0

63.0

65.0

67.0

69.0

71.0

73.0

74.0

76.0

78.0

80.0
GC

GC

GC

GC

80.5'

89.0'

94.0'

99.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, some Silty Clay,

trace medium to fine Sand, (DECOMPOSED ROCK).

...red-brown and blue-gray.

Top of Rock at 89 feet.

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, moderately weathered,

medium strong, very closely spaced fractures,

(WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, moderately weathered,

medium strong, very closely to closely spaced

fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 99 feet.

Notes:

S-35

S-36

S-37

S-38

C-1

C-2

1.3'

1.1'

1.0'

1.2'

2.8'

5.0'

65

57

50

60

55

7

100

52

-

-

-

-

11

14

10

8

19

35

25

100/5"

8

22

48

27

10

9

15

30

Rig chattering at

80.5'

EI. -78.4'

EI. -86.9'

EI. -91.9'

EI. -96.9'

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Hernandez/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/16/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697581.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 99'

END 4/17/09

START 4/16/09

BORING NO. BW- 14/CHS-1

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 23.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 4/17/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599514.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

81.0

83.0

84.9

85.0

87.0

89.0

94.0

99.0
1. Boring completed as slope inclinometer under direct

observation by MRCE.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

3. Slope inclinometer tremie grouted using 2x94-lb

bags of portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite,

potable water on 6/1/10.

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Hernandez/YU & Associates, Inc.

6 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/16/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697581.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 99'

END 4/17/09

START 4/16/09

BORING NO. BW- 14/CHS-1

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 23.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 13:30 DATE: 4/17/09

REMARKS

TIME: 13:30

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599514.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:
OL

SM

SM

8.5'

No recovery.

Black Organic SILT, occasional wood, plant matter,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray fine SAND, and(+) Silt, occasional plant matter,

(ALLUVIUM).

...dark gray, some(-) Silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

0.0'

0.3'

1.1'

1.0'

0

15

55

50

-

-

-

-

3

1

WH

2

1

WH

1

1

16

14

11

10

7

5

10

7

Organic material

observed in drill

cuttings

Advanced 4" casing

to 4'

Organic odor

Advanced 4" casing

to 9'

Advanced 4" casing

to 14'

Advanced 4" casing

to 19'

EI. -6.4'

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 1.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/21/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697586.3±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 102'

END 4/23/09

START 4/21/09

BORING NO.BW- 14A/CHS-1A

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 12:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/23/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599523.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

5.0

7.0

10.0

12.0

15.0

17.0

20.0
SM

ML

CL

ML

CL

23.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray coarse to fine SAND, little Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray SILT, below 21.1', (ALLUVIUM).

Blue and reddish gray varved Silty CLAY and Clayey

SILT, alternating 1/8"± silty clay, clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray Clayey SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brownish gray varved Silty CLAY and Clayey SILT,

alternating 1/8"± silty clay, clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-5A

S-5B

S-6

S-7

S-8

1.8'

2.0'

1.8'

2.0'

90

100

90

100

-

- PP

2.75

PP

3.25

PP

3.00

PP

1.75

13

7

13

14

12

23

25

31

10

13

19

23

11

14

18

16

Advanced 4" casing

to 24'

Advanced 4" casing

to 34'

EI. -21.4'

wet

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 1.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/21/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697586.3±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 102'

END 4/23/09

START 4/21/09

BORING NO.BW- 14A/CHS-1A

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 12:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/23/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599523.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Brownish gray varved Silty CLAY and Clayey SILT,

alternating 1/5"± to 1/4"± silty clay, clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown varved Silty CLAY, 1/4"± to 1/3"± varves,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown varved SILT & CLAY, 1/8"± varves,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-9

U-NR/

G-1

U-1

U-2

S-10

U-3

1.9'

0.5'

1.0'

1.2'

2.0'

95

25

50

58

100

PP

1.75

PP

1.75

TV

0.50

-

PP

1.25

TV

0.20

PP

1.25

PP

1.25

TV

0.20

9

17

15

12

P

U

S

H

P

U

S

H

P

U

S

H

4

9

7

12

P

U

S

H

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler: insufficient

recovery, sample

collected in a jar

G-1

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-1: mc=35%

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-2: mc=37%

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-3: mc=41%

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 1.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/21/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697586.3±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 102'

END 4/23/09

START 4/21/09

BORING NO.BW- 14A/CHS-1A

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 12:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/23/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599523.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

46.0

48.0

50.0

51.0

53.0

55.0

56.0

58.0
CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

U-4

U-5

1.7'

1.8'

83

88

PP

1.00

TV

0.40

PP

1.00

TV

0.40

P

U

S

H

P

U

S

H

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-4: mc=39%

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-5: mc=39%

moist

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 1.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/21/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697586.3±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 102'

END 4/23/09

START 4/21/09

BORING NO.BW- 14A/CHS-1A

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 12:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/23/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599523.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

61.0

63.0

70.0

72.0

80.0
ML

ML

80.5'

92.0'

97.0'

Grayish brown Clayey SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Clayey SILT, some medium to fine Gravel,

(GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 92.0 feet.

Red-brown MUDSTONE, highly to moderately

weathered, weak, extremely closely to moderately

spaced fractures, (WEATHERED PASSAIC

FORMATION).

Red-brown MUDSTONE, highly to moderately

weathered, weak, extremely closely to moderately

spaced fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC

FORMATION).

.....(continued on next page).

S-11A

S-11B

C-1

C-2

1.2'

5.0'

5.0'

60

100

47

100

PP

2.50

2

5

8

9

.....(continued from

previous page)

Hard drilling at 88'

to 92':

 Possible

Decomposed Rock

EI. -78.4'

EI. -89.9'

EI. -94.9'

wet

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 1.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/21/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697586.3±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 102'

END 4/23/09

START 4/21/09

BORING NO.BW- 14A/CHS-1A

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 12:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/23/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599523.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

82.0

92.0

97.0
102.0'

Red-brown MUDSTONE, highly to moderately

weathered, weak, with soil (sand) zone at 100.6' to

100.9', extremely closely to moderately spaced

fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 102 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring completed as slope inclinometer under direct

observation by MRCE.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

3. Slope inclinometer tremie grouted using 2x94-lb

bags of portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite,

potable water on 6/1/10.

58

.....(continued from

previous page)

EI. -99.9'

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY A. Fyodorova/YU & Associates, Inc.

6 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 1.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/21/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 Truck Mounted Rig with Safety Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697586.3±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY P. Lynch/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 102'

END 4/23/09

START 4/21/09

BORING NO.BW- 14A/CHS-1A

ELEVATION: 2.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek Marsh

TIME: 12:30

TIME: 13:00 DATE: 4/23/09

REMARKS

TIME: 13:00

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599523.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

102.0
SP-SM

SM

SP-SM

ML

PT

SM

SM

SM

SM

10.0'

12.0'

Black coarse to fine SAND, some medium to fine

Gravel, trace Silt, occasional brick fragments, (FILL).

...dark brown, some(-) Clayey Silt, occasional cinders.

...black, coarse to medium, some fine Gravel, trace

Silt.

Gray SILT, some fine Sand, (FILL).

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Grayish brown medium to fine(+) SAND, and(-) Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

...fine.

...fine, some(-) Silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

U-1

S-6

S-7

S-8

1.5'

1.5'

1.7'

1.7'

0.3'

1.7'

1.5'

1.5'

1.0'

75

75

85

85

15

85

75

75

50

-

-

-

-

-

TV

0.70

-

-

-

13

20

35

18

12

16

17

14

8

10

11

10

7

6

5

5

WH

1

WH

1

P

U

S

H

3

4

5

5

5

7

7

9

3

5

6

7

Hand augered to 2'

PID= 0.0 ppm

PID= 0.0 ppm

PID= 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 5'

PID= 0.0 ppm

PID= 0.0 ppm

PID= 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 10'

PID= 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1: mc=21.0%

Non-plastic

37.6%<#200

PID= 0.0 ppm

PID= 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 15'

PID= 0.0 ppm

EI. -5.4'

EI. -7.4'

moist

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 0.8' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/31/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697425.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 100'

END 1/5/09

START 12/31/08

BORING NO. BW- 15

ELEVATION: 4.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:10 DATE: 1/5/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599671.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
SM

ML

ML

ML

ML

ML

CL

CL

CL

CL

26.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Grayish brown fine SAND, some(-) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Grayish brown SILT, trace fine Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

Grayish brown Clayey SILT, trace(-) fine Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

Grayish brown Clayey SILT, trace(-) fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Grayish brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

trace(-) fine Sand, alternating 1/8"± to 3/8"± silty clay,

1/16"± to 1/8"± clayey silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Grayish brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

trace(-) fine Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/8"± to 3/8"± silty clay, 1/16"± to 1/8"±

clayey silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-9

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

U-2

S-16

S-17

1.0'

1.7'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.0'

1.7'

2.0'

2.0'

50

85

100

100

100

100

50

85

100

100

-

PP

1.00

PP

1.25

PP

1.50

PP

1.50

PP

2.00

PP

2.25

TV

0.75

PP

1.50

PP

0.50

3

4

5

5

3

4

4

4

5

4

4

4

5

5

6

7

3

4

5

7

5

6

9

10

5

7

8

11

P

U

S

H

5

5

6

6

WH

WH

2

5

PID= 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 20'

S-11: mc=28.2%

LL=22, PI=1

98.1%<#200

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc=21.0%

LL=27, PI=9

99.8%<#200

EI. -21.4'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 0.8' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/31/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697425.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 100'

END 1/5/09

START 12/31/08

BORING NO. BW- 15

ELEVATION: 4.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:10 DATE: 1/5/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599671.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

34.0

36.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/4"± to 1/2"± silty clay, 1/8"± to 1/4"±

clayey silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/4"± to 1/2"± silty clay, 1/8"± to 1/4"±

clayey silt.

...alternating 3/8"± to 1"± silty clay, 1/8"± to 1/4"±

clayey silt.

...alternating 1/5"± to 3/4"± silty clay, 1/8"± clayey silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-18

S-19

S-20

S-21

S-22

S-23

S-24

S-25

S-26

S-27

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

PP

0.75

PP

0.75

PP

0.50

PP

0.38

PP

0.53

PP

0.53

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

2

3

4

4

2

3

3

3

WH

2

2

3

WH

WH

WH

2

1

1

3

4

WH

2

2

2

WH

WH

WH

1

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 0.8' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/31/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697425.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 100'

END 1/5/09

START 12/31/08

BORING NO. BW- 15

ELEVATION: 4.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:10 DATE: 1/5/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599671.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

44.0

46.0

48.0

50.0

52.0

54.0

56.0

58.0

60.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/5"± to 3/4"± silty clay, 1/8"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt & Clay,

alternating 1/3"± silty clay, 3/16"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 7/8"± to 1.5"± silty clay, 1/16"± to 1/4"±

clayey silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1"± to 1.5"± silty clay, 1/8"± clayey silt.

Red-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1"± to 1.5"± clay & silt, 1/8"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1"± to 1.5"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-28

S-29

U-3

S-30

S-31

S-32

S-33

S-34

S-35

S-36

2.0'

2.0'

1.8'

2.0'

2.0'

0.8'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

90

100

100

40

100

100

100

100

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

TV

0.45

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

0.38

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

0.25

WH

1

1

2

WH

WH

WH

WH

P

U

S

H

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

4

4

WH

1

WH

WH

WH

WH

1

WH

WH

1

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

1

1

1

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-3: mc=40.0%

LL=31 and 65, PI=8

and 38

99.9%<#200

S-34: mc=33%

LL=36, PI=19

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 0.8' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/31/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697425.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 100'

END 1/5/09

START 12/31/08

BORING NO. BW- 15

ELEVATION: 4.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:10 DATE: 1/5/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599671.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

64.0

66.0

68.0

70.0

72.0

74.0

76.0

78.0

80.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

88.0'

93.0'

95.0'

100.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1"± to 1.5"± silty clay, 1/4"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown CLAY & SILT, some fine Gravel, little(+)

coarse to medium Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, completely weathered,

extremely weak, (DECOMPOSED ROCK).

Top of Rock at 95.0 feet.

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, moderately to slightly

weathered, medium strong to strong, closely to

moderately spaced fractures, (COMPETENT

PASSAIC FORMATION).

S-37

S-38

S-39

S-40

S-41

S-42

S-43

C-1

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.5'

1.4'

0.1'

4.8'

100

100

100

100

75

70

6

96

58

PP

0.38

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

-

-

-

1

1

1

1

WR

WR

WR

WR

1

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

5

12

14

15

10

31

22

33

4

15

100/4"

EI. -83.4'

EI. -88.4'

EI. -90.4'

EI. -95.4'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 0.8' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/31/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697425.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 100'

END 1/5/09

START 12/31/08

BORING NO. BW- 15

ELEVATION: 4.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:10 DATE: 1/5/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599671.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

82.0

84.0

86.0

88.0

90.0

92.0

93.8

95.0

100.0
Bottom of borehole at 100 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x95-lb bags of

portland cement, 10 lbs of bentonite, potable water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

6 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 0.8' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 12/31/08

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-75 Truck Mounted Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697425.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY D. Mendez/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 100'

END 1/5/09

START 12/31/08

BORING NO. BW- 15

ELEVATION: 4.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION USPS

TIME: 7:30

TIME: 7:10 DATE: 1/5/09

REMARKS

TIME: 7:10

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599671.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:
SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SM

PT

ML

SM

SM

SM

ML

8.9'

10.0'

18.0'

2" ASPHALT CONCRETE, 8" CONCRETE over 10"

ASPHALT CONCRETE, 4" SUBBASE.

Gray coarse to fine SAND, some coarse to fine

Gravel, trace Silt, (FILL).

...dark brown, little coarse to fine Gravel, occasional

roots.

Brown fine SAND, little Silt, (FILL).

Brown fibrous PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray Clayey SILT, trace fine Sand, occasional roots,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray fine SAND, and Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...brown.

Brown Clayey SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

0.5'

1.4'

0.7'

1.4'

1.4'

1.4'

1.7'

25

71

35

71

71

71

84

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

3

4

3

WH

WH

1

1

1

3

3

3

8

8

7

10

4

6

6

6

6

8

10

12

10

11

9

10

Hand excavated to

6' for utility

clearance

S-1, S-2 blow

counts not recorded

Advanced 4" casing

to 15'

S-6: mc=22.6%

44.3%<#200

EI. -5.1'

EI. -6.2'

EI. -14.2'

moist

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/14/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697627.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 111'

END 4/16/09

START 4/14/09

BORING NO. BW- 16

ELEVATION: 3.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Newark JC Tpk

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 14:15 DATE: 4/16/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599578.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
ML

ML

ML

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Brown varved Clayey SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Brown Clayey SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

...gray.

Gray CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

1.7'

1.4'

1.8'

1.8'

84

71

92

92

PP

1.25

PP

2.25

-

PP

1.50

10

10

10

12

4

6

7

10

6

7

7

12

4

5

5

7

Advanced 4" casing

to 25'

Advanced 4" casing

to 30'

S-13: mc=29.5%

LL=30, PI=11

wet

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/14/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697627.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 111'

END 4/16/09

START 4/14/09

BORING NO. BW- 16

ELEVATION: 3.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Newark JC Tpk

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 14:15 DATE: 4/16/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599578.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

40.0
CH

CH

CH

CH

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown varved Silty CLAY and CLAY & SILT,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-14

U-1

S-15

S-16

S-17

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

100

PP

1.25

PP

1.25

TV

0.18

PP

1.25

PP

1.00

PP

0.50

4

3

3

4

P

U

S

H

2

3

3

2

WH

2

2

3

WR

WH

WH

WH

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1: mc=34.6%

LL=35 and 56

PI=15 and 32

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/14/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697627.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 111'

END 4/16/09

START 4/14/09

BORING NO. BW- 16

ELEVATION: 3.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Newark JC Tpk

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 14:15 DATE: 4/16/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599578.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

43.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

ML

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown varved CLAY & SILT,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown varved CLAY & SILT and CLAY,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown varved CLAY & SILT, 1/4"± varves,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Clayey SILT, occasional fine sand seams,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-18

S-19

U-2

S-20

S-21

U-NR/

S-22

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

100

100

PP

0.50

PP

<0.5

PP

1.00

TV

0.50

PP

0.50

PP

0.50

PP

0.50

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

P

U

S

H

6

6

4

6

WR

WH

WH

WH

3

3

4

10

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc=37.5%

LL=33 and 60

PI=13 and 44

Bentonite

introduced at 72'

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler, material

recovered with SPT

split spoon: blow

counts represent

that of disturbed

material

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/14/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697627.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 111'

END 4/16/09

START 4/14/09

BORING NO. BW- 16

ELEVATION: 3.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Newark JC Tpk

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 14:15 DATE: 4/16/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599578.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

65.0

67.0

68.0

70.0

72.0

75.0

77.0

78.0

80.0
ML

82.5'

91.0'

96.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown Clayey SILT, occasional fine sand seams,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Clayey SILT, some coarse to fine Sand,

little medium to fine Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

No recovery.

Top of Rock at 91 feet.

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, moderately weathered, very

weak to medium strong, closely spaced fractures,

(WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Red-brown CLAYSTONE, slightly to moderately

weathered, very weak to medium strong, very closely

to closely spaced fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC

FORMATION).

.....(continued on next page).

S-23

S-24

C-1

C-2

0.5'

0.0'

4.8'

5.0'

25

0

97

43

100

-

-

6

8

6

11

100/2"

EI. -78.7'

EI. -87.2'

EI. -92.2'

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/14/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697627.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 111'

END 4/16/09

START 4/14/09

BORING NO. BW- 16

ELEVATION: 3.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Newark JC Tpk

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 14:15 DATE: 4/16/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599578.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

85.0

87.0

90.0

90.2

91.0

96.0
111.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown CLAYSTONE, slightly to moderately

weathered, weak to medium strong, very closely to

closely spaced fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC

FORMATION).

...slightly weathered, medium strong, closely to

moderately spaced fractures.

Bottom of borehole at 111 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, and cold

patched with asphalt.

C-3

C-4

4.6'

4.8'

65

92

62

97

70 EI. -107.2'

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY N. DelGrosso/YU & Associates, Inc.

6 OF 6

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 4/14/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-55 ATV with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697627.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 111'

END 4/16/09

START 4/14/09

BORING NO. BW- 16

ELEVATION: 3.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Newark JC Tpk

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 14:15 DATE: 4/16/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599578.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

101.0

106.0

111.0
OL

OL

OL

PT

SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

11.0'

Black Organic Clayey SILT, frequent fibers,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Brown fine SAND, little Silt, occasional roots,

(ALLUVIUM).

...coarse(+) to medium, little fine Gravel, trace Silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

U-1/

U-NR

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

0.5'

0.7'

0.5'

0.0'

0.5'

0.0'

0.5'

1.5'

1.0'

1.0'

25

35

25

0

25

0

25

75

50

50

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

P

U

S

H

2

1

1

1

3

7

12

14

8

9

15

17

8

8

8

7

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 8'

PID = 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a Shelby tube

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 13'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 18'

EI. -9.9'

moist

moist

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 1.0'

DATE: 11/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696580.0±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89'

END 12/2/09

START 11/23/09

BORING NO. BW-201

ELEVATION: 1.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 29.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:15

TIME: 8:00 DATE: 12/1/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597242.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
SP-SM

SM

ML

CL

CL

33.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown coarse(+) to medium SAND, some fine Gravel,

trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...gray-brown fine, some Silt.

Gray-brown Clayey SILT, trace fine Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, trace(-) fine

Sand, alternating 1/8"± to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

U-2

1.3'

1.0'

1.3'

1.5'

2.0'

65

50

65

75

100

-

-

PP

1.50

PP

1.00

TV

0.65

9

6

9

8

13

24

30

35

17

15

15

16

8

8

13

12

P

U

S

H

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 29'

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc = 29%,

LL = 35, PI = 15,

98.7% < #200

EI. -32.4'

wet

wet

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 1.0'

DATE: 11/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696580.0±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89'

END 12/2/09

START 11/23/09

BORING NO. BW-201

ELEVATION: 1.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 29.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:15

TIME: 8:00 DATE: 12/1/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597242.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CH

CL

58.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, alternating

1/8"± to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, alternating

1/4"± to 3/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/8"± to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-14

S-15

U-3

S-16

S-17

2.0'

1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

75

100

100

100

PP

1.25

PP

1.00

-

PP

0.75

PP

0.75

13

12

14

13

5

6

11

10

P

U

S

H

8

10

12

15

12

6

8

9

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

EI. -57.4'

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 1.0'

DATE: 11/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696580.0±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89'

END 12/2/09

START 11/23/09

BORING NO. BW-201

ELEVATION: 1.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 29.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:15

TIME: 8:00 DATE: 12/1/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597242.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

48.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
SC

SC

SC

73.0'

78.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown coarse to medium SAND, some Clay &

Silt, trace fine Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

No recovery.

Red-brown coarse to medium SAND, some Clay &

Silt, little fine Gravel, (GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 73.0 feet.

Red-brown MUDSTONE, highly weathered,

(DECOMPOSED ROCK).

.....(continued on next page).

S-18

C-NR

S-19

S-20

C-1

0.2'

0.0'

0.2'

0.2'

1.8'

10

0

10

13

36

7

50

-

-

-

-

34

43

26

29

12

15

16

20

17

31

40

50/1"

Rotary bit refusal at

62'

Core barrel jammed

at 65'

Advanced 3" casing

to 70'

Rotary bit refusal at

73'

EI. -71.9'

EI. -77.4'

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 1.0'

DATE: 11/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696580.0±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89'

END 12/2/09

START 11/23/09

BORING NO. BW-201

ELEVATION: 1.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 29.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:15

TIME: 8:00 DATE: 12/1/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597242.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

65.0

67.0

70.0

71.6

73.0

78.0

79.0
84.0'

89.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown MUDSTONE, highly to moderately

weathered, weak to medium strong, extremely closely

to closely spaced fractures, (WEATHERED PASSAIC

FORMATION).

Red-brown MUDSTONE, moderately to slightly

weathered, medium strong to strong, very closely to

moderately spaced fractures, (COMPETENT

PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 89 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag bentonite, potable

water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in the

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

C-2

C-3

2.5'

4.7'

7

94

56

EI. -82.9'

EI. -87.9'

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 1.0'

DATE: 11/23/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696580.0±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 89'

END 12/2/09

START 11/23/09

BORING NO. BW-201

ELEVATION: 1.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0"/3.0" DEPTH: 29.0'/70.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:15

TIME: 8:00 DATE: 12/1/09

REMARKS

TIME: 8:00

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597242.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

84.0

89.0
OL

OL

PT

PT

SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

8.0'

Black Organic CLAY & SILT, occasional fibers,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown fine SAND, some(+) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown medium to fine SAND, trace Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

...coarse to fine Sand, little(+) fine Gravel.

...coarse to fine.

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

U-1

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

0.5'

0.5'

0.3'

1.0'

1.0'

1.0'

1.7'

1.0'

1.0'

0.5'

25

25

15

50

50

50

85

50

50

25

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

WR

P

U

S

H

1

1

2

4

3

5

6

9

4

7

20

18

14

13

16

15

8

5

6

6

4

8

9

10

PID = 0.0 ppm

Depth to mud line

was about 0.8'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

in very soft soil to 6'

PID = 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1: mc = 229.1%

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 14'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -7.0'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -0.8'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696669.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/20/09

START 11/20/09

BORING NO. BW-202

ELEVATION: 1.0±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597451.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
SP-SM

SP-SM

CL

CL

CL

28.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown coarse to fine SAND, little fine Gravel,

trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...medium to fine.

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, alternating

1/8"± to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

U-2

1.0'

1.5'

1.5'

1.5'

1.5'

50

75

75

75

75

-

-

PP

1.00

PP

1.25

TV

0.40

7

9

10

11

5

6

7

9

10

5

8

8

8

7

8

8

P

U

S

H

Advanced 4" casing

to 20'

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 29'

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc = 29.0%,

LL = 36, PI = 18,

99.4% < #200

EI. -27.5'

wet

wet

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -0.8'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696669.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/20/09

START 11/20/09

BORING NO. BW-202

ELEVATION: 1.0±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597451.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

42.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, alternating

1/8"± to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Bottom of borehole at 42 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite and

potable water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

S-14 1.4'

70

PP

1.00

6

8

8

7 EI. -41.0'

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -0.8'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696669.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/20/09

START 11/20/09

BORING NO. BW-202

ELEVATION: 1.0±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597451.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0
OL

OL

SP

SP

SP

SP

SP

SP-SM

SP

SP

4.0'

Black Organic SILT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

...occasional wood fragments.

Brown fine SAND, trace fine Gravel, (ALLUVIUM).

...coarse to fine.

...medium to fine.

...coarse to fine.

...medium to fine, trace Silt.

...coarse to fine.

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

0.3'

0.5'

0.8'

1.0'

1.2'

1.5'

1.7'

1.0'

1.3'

1.5'

15

25

40

50

60

75

85

50

65

75

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WH

WH

WH

WH

12

3

2

1

7

10

12

10

10

8

10

12

10

11

11

13

6

10

15

17

22

22

26

22

16

17

18

18

18

17

14

15

10

7

4

10

Depth to mudline

1.5'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 4'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 14'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -4.1'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta / J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.7'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696849.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 73'

END 11/19/09

START 11/12/09

BORING NO. BW-203

ELEVATION: -0.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597823.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
ML

ML

CL

CL

CL

CL

28.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown Clayey SILT, trace(-) fine Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, alternating

1/8"± to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, alternating

1/8"± to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, little(+)

medium to fine Gravel, trace coarse to fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-11

S-12

S-13

U-NR

S-14

U-1A

1.7'

1.5'

1.7'

0.0'

2.0'

1.7'

85

75

85

0

100

85

PP

1.00

PP

1.00

PP

1.00

-

PP

0.75

PP

0.55

9

9

15

17

15

17

12

17

7

9

9

11

P

U

S

H

6

8

9

11

P

U

S

H

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 24'

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a Shelby tube

Advanced 4" casing

to 34'

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1A: mc = 35.3%,

LL = 39, PI = 17,

78.3% < #200

EI. -28.6'

wet

wet

moist

wet

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta / J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.7'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696849.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 73'

END 11/19/09

START 11/12/09

BORING NO. BW-203

ELEVATION: -0.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597823.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

33.0

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

58.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Silt, alternating

1/8"± to 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...red-brown.

Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt, alternating 1/4"

to 3/4"± silty clay, 1/16"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/4" to 3/4"± silty clay, 1/16"± silt.

.....(continued on next page).

S-15

S-16

S-17

U-2

S-18

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.7'

2.0'

100

100

100

85

100

PP

1.00

PP

1.25

PP

1.00

TV

0.40

PP

1.25

6

6

7

9

8

6

8

9

7

8

11

9

P

U

S

H

6

11

14

14

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

EI. -58.6'

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta / J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.7'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696849.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 73'

END 11/19/09

START 11/12/09

BORING NO. BW-203

ELEVATION: -0.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597823.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

53.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
GC

65.0'

73.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown fine GRAVEL, some(-) coarse to medium

Sand, some Clay & Silt, (DECOMPOSED ROCK).

Top of Rock at 65.0 feet.

Red-brown MUDSTONE, highly weathered, weak,

extremely closely to closely spaced fractures,

(WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 73 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite and

potable water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

S-19

C-1

C-2

0.1'

2.5'

1.0'

100

50

0

33

0

50/1" -

Rotary bit refusal at

65'

Core barrel jammed

at 73 ft

EI. -65.1'

EI. -73.1'

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY S. Calabretta / J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.7'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696849.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 73'

END 11/19/09

START 11/12/09

BORING NO. BW-203

ELEVATION: -0.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 34.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597823.4±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

60.1

65.0

70.0

73.0
OH

OH

PT

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

ML

ML

7.0'

16.0'

Black Organic CLAY & SILT, occassional plant matter,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Light brown medium to fine SAND, trace Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

...coarse to fine.

...trace fine Gravel.

Gray-brown SILT & CLAY varved with Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/8" to 1/4"± silt & clay, 1/16"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

U-NR

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

0.5'

1.0'

0.7'

0.0'

1.0'

1.5'

0.7'

1.5'

1.3'

1.3'

25

50

35

0

50

75

35

75

65

67

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

PP

1.50

PP

1.50

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WR

3

2

4

P

U

S

H

6

8

7

8

7

9

6

8

7

9

6

7

13

10

9

11

6

12

11

18

13

20

22

24

PID = 0.0 ppm

Depth to mud line

was about 1.5'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

attempted using a

Shelby tube

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 8'

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 13'

PID = 0.0 ppm

Silt & Clay in spoon

tip

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 18'

EI. -8.2'

EI. -17.2'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.5'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696980.7±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/11/09

START 11/10/09

BORING NO. BW-204

ELEVATION: -1.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 24.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598166.9±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
ML

ML

ML

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown SILT & CLAY varved with Silty Clay, trace

fine Sand, alternating 1/4"± silt & clay, 1/32"± silty

clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY varved with Clay & Silt, trace(-) fine

Sand, alternating 1/8" to 1/4"± silty clay, 1/16" to 1/8" ±

clay & silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY varved with Clay & Silt, trace(-) fine

Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

U-2

1.3'

1.0'

1.5'

1.7'

1.7'

65

50

75

85

85

PP

1.75

PP

1.75

PP

1.75

PP

1.00

TV

0.55

11

21

29

32

10

18

25

21

17

20

27

29

13

15

19

11

P

U

S

H

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 24'

Cleaned out to 38'

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc = 24.0%,

LL = 46, PI = 26,

99.5% < #200

wet

wet

wet

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.5'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696980.7±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/11/09

START 11/10/09

BORING NO. BW-204

ELEVATION: -1.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 24.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598166.9±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

42.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown varved Silty CLAY and CLAY & SILT, trace(-)

fine Sand, alternating 1/8"± silty clay, 1/8"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Bottom of borehole at 42 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, potable

water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

S-14 2.0'

100

PP

1.00

10

9

12

14 EI. -43.2'

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -1.5'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696980.7±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/11/09

START 11/10/09

BORING NO. BW-204

ELEVATION: -1.2±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 24.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 598166.9±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0
SM

OL

SM

SM

ML

SM

SM

SP-SM

SM

ML

ML

2.0'

4.0'

18.0'

Dark gray medium to fine(+) SAND, some(+) Clayey

Silt, frequent paper and wood fragments, (FILL).

Dark gray Organic SILT & CLAY, some fine Sand,

occasional roots, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Grayish brown medium to fine(+) SAND, little Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Grayish brown Clayey SILT, little fine Sand, below

7.5', (ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown fine SAND, little Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...trace Silt.

...medium(+) to fine.

Gray-brown Clayey SILT, trace(-) Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown Clayey SILT varved with Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/8" to 1/4"± clayey silt, 1/8"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4A

S-4B

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

0.3'

0.1'

1.0'

1.6'

1.0'

1.5'

1.0'

1.3'

1.5'

1.3'

13

5

50

80

50

75

50

65

75

67

-

-

-

- PP

0.63

-

-

-

-

PP

1.63

PP

1.75

WR

WR

WR

8

3

1

1

1

3

5

9

13

8

9

4

6

7

8

8

8

9

11

10

13

7

8

4

4

25

22

25

23

14

11

12

20

8

16

16

17

Depth to mudline

2.5'

PID= 0.0 PPM

PID= 0.0 PPM

PID= 0.0 PPM

Advanced 4" casing

to 6'

PID= 0.0 PPM

PID= 0.0 PPM

Advanced 4" casing

to 10'

PID= 0.0 PPM

PID= 0.0 PPM

Advanced 4" casing

to 15'

PID= 0.0 PPM

PID= 0.0 PPM

EI. -2.3'

EI. -4.3'

EI. -18.3'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -2.5'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697381.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/3/09

START 10/30/09

BORING NO. BW-205

ELEVATION: -0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599048.0±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown SILT & CLAY trace fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown SILT & CLAY varved with Silty Clay, trace

fine Sand, alternating 1/8" to 1/4" ± silt & clay, 1/8"±

silty clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/8" to 1/4" clay & silt, and 1/8" clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

.....(continued on next page).

U-1

S-11

U-NR

S-12

S-13

U-NR

0.5'

1.3'

0.0'

1.7'

1.7'

0.0'

25

65

0

85

85

0

-

PP

1.00

-

PP

1.00

PP

1.25

-

P

U

S

H

8

15

19

17

P

U

S

H

11

11

12

13

8

10

12

15

P

U

S

H

Advanced 4" casing

to 21'

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

piston sampler

U-1: mc = 21.2%,

LL = 31, PI = 8,

91.7% < #200

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a piston

sampler

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -2.5'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697381.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/3/09

START 10/30/09

BORING NO. BW-205

ELEVATION: -0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599048.0±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

21.0

23.0

25.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

42.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown CLAY & SILT varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/8" to 1/4" clay & silt, 1/8" clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Bottom of borehole at 42 feet.

Notes:

1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, potable

water.

2. Water level was approximately 2.5' above top of soil

3. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

S-14 1.0'

50

PP

1.25

5

13

17

24 EI. -42.3' moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: -2.5'

DATE:

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697381.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 42'

END 11/3/09

START 10/30/09

BORING NO. BW-205

ELEVATION: -0.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 25.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME:

TIME: DATE:

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599048.0±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0
OH

OH

PT

OL

PT

OL

SM

CL

CL

CL-ML

CL

10.0'

Dark brown Organic CLAY & SILT, occasional fibers,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Dark brown Organic CLAY, and coarse to fine Gravel,

(ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Greenish gray Organic SILT & CLAY, (ORGANIC

DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown fine SAND, some(-) Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown SILT & CLAY, little fine Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT, trace(-) fine Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown SILT & CLAY, trace(+) medium to fine

Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

U-1

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

U-2

S-8A

1.0'

0.5'

1.0'

1.5'

0.7'

1.0'

1.3'

1.5'

2.0'

50

25

50

75

35

50

65

75

100

85

-

-

-

-

PP

<0.25

-

PP

0.75

PP

0.75

TV

0.45

PP

0.50

WR

WR

WH

WR

WH

WH

WH

1

1

1

1

1

P

U

S

H

WH

WH

1

2

5

9

11

7

5

2

3

4

3

6

6

6

P

U

S

H

14

26

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 5' bgs

PID = 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1: mc = 373.4%,

LL = 371, PI = 122,

54.0% < #200

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 11' bgs

PID = 0.0 ppm

PID = 0.0 ppm

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc = 31.1%,

LL = 27, PI = 5,

90.3% < #200

Advanced 4" casing

to 19' bgs

PID = 0.0 ppm

EI. -11.1'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.4' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 11/3/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697533.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 79'

END 11/9/09

START 11/3/09

BORING NO. BW-206

ELEVATION: -1.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 24.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:30

TIME: 7:45 DATE: 11/9/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599361.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

17.0

19.0
ML

CL

CL

CL

CL

28.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown Clayey SILT, some fine Sand, below

19.5', (ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown CLAY & SILT, trace(-) fine Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt, trace(-)

medium to fine Sand, alternating 1/8" to 1/4"± silty

clay, 1/16"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt, trace(-)

medium to fine Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-8B

S-9

S-10

S-11

U-3

1.7'

2.0'

1.5'

1.5'

1.7'

100

75

75

85

- PP

1.75

PP

1.75

PP

1.75

PP

1.50

TV

0.75

21

15

9

20

21

25

10

12

20

18

10

10

17

14

P

U

S

H

PID = 0.0 ppm

Advanced 4" casing

to 24' bgs

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-3: mc = 34.4%,

LL = 42, PI = 20,

99.1% < #200

EI. -29.6'

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.4' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 11/3/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697533.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 79'

END 11/9/09

START 11/3/09

BORING NO. BW-206

ELEVATION: -1.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 24.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:30

TIME: 7:45 DATE: 11/9/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599361.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

21.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown Silty CLAY varved with Silt, trace(-)

medium to fine Sand, alternating 1/8" to 1/4"± silty

clay, 1/16"± silt, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...red-brown, alternating 1/4" to 3/4"± silty clay, 1/16"±

silt.

Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt,

alternating 1/4" to 1"± silty clay, 1/16"± clayey silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt, and(-)

coarse to medium Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

U-4

1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

75

100

100

100

100

PP

1.00

PP

1.00

PP

0.75

PP

0.50

-

5

9

8

10

8

11

12

13

8

9

12

12

4

5

6

9

P

U

S

H

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-4: mc = 32.7%,

LL = 45, PI = 23,

63.4% < #200

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.4' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 11/3/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697533.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 79'

END 11/9/09

START 11/3/09

BORING NO. BW-206

ELEVATION: -1.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 24.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:30

TIME: 7:45 DATE: 11/9/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599361.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

58.0

60.0
CL

CL

GC

68.5'

79.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Red-brown Silty CLAY varved with Clayey Silt, and(-)

coarse to medium Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Red-brown medium to fine GRAVEL, little coarse

Sand, some Clay & Silt, (DECOMPOSED ROCK).

Red-brown MUDSTONE, highly weathered,

(DECOMPOSED ROCK).

Bottom of borehole at 79 feet.

Notes:

S-16

S-17

S-18

C-1

1.7'

1.3'

1.0'

1.5'

85

65

50

30

0

PP

0.50

PP

0.75

-

7

9

10

12

11

10

14

19

38

59

40

52

Hard drilling from

72' to 74'

Rotary bit refusal at

74'

EI. -69.6'

EI. -80.1'

moist

moist

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.4' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 11/3/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697533.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 79'

END 11/9/09

START 11/3/09

BORING NO. BW-206

ELEVATION: -1.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 24.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:30

TIME: 7:45 DATE: 11/9/09

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599361.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

65.0

67.0

70.0

72.0

74.0

79.0
1. Boring tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags of

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, potable

water.

2. Water level was approximately 2'5" above top of soil

upon completion.

3. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Yu/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 2.4' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.3'

DATE: 11/3/09

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer (on barrel float)

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 697533.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Blejwas/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 79'

END 11/9/09

START 11/3/09

BORING NO. BW-206

ELEVATION: -1.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 24.0' USCS

DATE: 2/20/12

LOCATION Cedar Creek

TIME: 11:30

TIME: 7:45 DATE: 11/9/09

REMARKS

TIME: 7:45

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 599361.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:
GP

GP

ML

ML

PT

SM

SP

SM

SP

SM

ML

7.0'

8.0'

20.0'

Black medium to fine GRAVEL, and brick fragments,

trace fine Sand, trace Silt, frequent roots, (FILL).

Black medium to fine GRAVEL, some cinders, little

medium to fine Sand, trace Silt, (FILL).

Black Clayey SILT, and medium to fine Gravel,

(FILL).

Dark brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray fine SAND, little Clayey Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray fine SAND, trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Greenish gray fine SAND, little Clayey Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray fine SAND, trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

...and Silt.

Brown Clayey SILT, little fine Sand, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4A

S-4B

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

0.5'

0.5'

0.3'

0.4'

0.7'

1.7'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.0'

25

25

15

20

35

85

100

100

100

50

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

4

5

6

2

4

4

4

1

3

3

3

2

3

2

3

2

3

2

6

8

10

9

14

5

10

10

12

10

15

14

13

4

5

4

5

3

6

8

10

S-3: mc=109.7%

55.0%<#200

S-5: mc=19.6%

46.0%<#200

EI. -4.2'

EI. -5.2'

EI. -17.2'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 7

DURING DRILLING: 0.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 10/24/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698047.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 118'

END 11/1/11

START 10/24/11

BORING NO. BW-317

ELEVATION: 2.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 35.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 15:30 DATE: 10/31/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600637.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray SILT & CLAY varved with brown Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/8"± silt & clay, 1/16"± clay & silt, trace

fine Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray SILT & CLAY varved with brown Clay & Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray SILT & CLAY varved with brown Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/8"± silt & clay, 1/16"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray CLAY & SILT varved with brown Silt & Clay,

alternating 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-11

U-1

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

S-16

S-17

S-18

2.0'

2.0'

1.8'

1.7'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

90

85

100

100

100

100

100

100

PP

2.00

PP

1.50

TV

1.00

PP

1.50

PP

1.25

PP

1.00

PP

1.50

PP

1.00

PP

1.25

PP

0.50

PP

2

5

6

8

P

U

S

H

2

2

2

2

4

4

3

2

4

4

6

4

3

6

6

6

2

3

3

4

3

5

5

5

1

2

2

2

3

2

S-11: mc=28.3%

LL=31, PI=8

100%<#200

Easier drilling from

22'

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1: mc=29.5%

LL=32, PI=9

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

moist

moist

moist

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 7

DURING DRILLING: 0.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 10/24/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698047.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 118'

END 11/1/11

START 10/24/11

BORING NO. BW-317

ELEVATION: 2.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 35.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 15:30 DATE: 10/31/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600637.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

23.0

25.0

27.0

29.0

31.0

33.0

35.0

37.0

39.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Gray CLAY & SILT varved with brown Silt & Clay,

alternating 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...alternating 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/8"± silt & clay.

Brown CLAY & SILT, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-19

S-20

S-21

S-22

S-23

S-24

S-25

S-26

S-27

U-2

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

0.50

PP

0.75

PP

0.75

PP

0.25

PP

0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

TV

0.10

4

3

1

2

1

2

4

3

4

5

WH

WH

2

2

1

2

1

2

WR

WH

WH

2

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

P

U

S

H

S-26: mc=29.6%

LL=35, PI=15

100%<#200

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc=41.8%

LL=36, PI=16

100%<#200

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 7

DURING DRILLING: 0.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 10/24/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698047.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 118'

END 11/1/11

START 10/24/11

BORING NO. BW-317

ELEVATION: 2.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 35.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 15:30 DATE: 10/31/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600637.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

41.0

43.0

45.0

47.0

49.0

51.0

53.0

55.0

57.0

58.0

60.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

.....(continued from previous page). Brown CLAY & SILT varved with gray-brown Silty

Clay, alternating 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silty clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Brown CLAY & SILT varved with red-brown Silty Clay,

alternating 1/4"± clay & silt, 1/16"± silty clay, trace fine

Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-28

S-29

S-30

S-31

S-32

S-33

U-3

S-34

S-35

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

0.0'

2.0'

2.0'

100

100

100

100

100

100

0

100

100

PP

<0.25

PP

0.50

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

-

PP

0.50

PP

0.25

WR

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

1

2

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WR

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

P

U

S

H

4

5

5

6

1

2

2

3

Undisturbed

sampling attempted

with a Shelby tube

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 7

DURING DRILLING: 0.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 10/24/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698047.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 118'

END 11/1/11

START 10/24/11

BORING NO. BW-317

ELEVATION: 2.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 35.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 15:30 DATE: 10/31/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600637.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

64.0

66.0

68.0

70.0

72.0

73.0

75.0

77.0

79.0

80.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

SM

CL

GC

99.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown Silty CLAY, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY varved with red-brown Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/16"± silty clay, 1/32"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown fine SAND, some Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown CLAY & SILT, little fine Sand,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown medium to fine Gravel, and Silty Clay, little

coarse to fine Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

U-3A

S-36

S-37

S-38

S-39

S-40

S-41

S-42

S-43

S-44

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

0.7'

2.0'

0.8'

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

35

100

64

PP

0.50

TV

0.10

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

-

PP

<0.25

-

P

U

S

H

1

1

1

2

WR

WR

WH

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

3

2

2

3

4

4

3

4

3

3

9

10

9

12

WR

2

4

3

7

13

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-3A: mc=40.8%

LL=44, PI=23

100%<#200

Dropped 10' rods

with spoon in hole.

Upon retrieval of

sample and rods,

hole advanced to

99' due to sample

retrieval.

Hard drilling from

99'

EI. -96.2'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 7

DURING DRILLING: 0.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 10/24/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698047.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 118'

END 11/1/11

START 10/24/11

BORING NO. BW-317

ELEVATION: 2.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 35.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 15:30 DATE: 10/31/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600637.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

82.0

84.0

86.0

88.0

90.0

92.0

94.0

96.0

98.0

99.0
GC

103.0'

118.0'

Red-brown coarse to fine Gravel, and Silty Clay, little

coarse to fine Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

Top of Rock at 103.0 feet.

Red-brown SILTSTONE/MUDSTONE, slightly

weathered, medium strong, closely to moderately

spaced fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC

FORMATION).

Red-brown MUDSTONE, slightly weathered, weak to

medium strong, calcareous, closely to moderately

spaced fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC

FORMATION).

Red-brown MUDSTONE, slightly weathered, medium

strong, closely to moderately spaced fractures,

(COMPETENT PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 118 feet.

Notes:

1. Borehole tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, and 50

S-45

C-1

C-2

C-3

0.8'

4.8'

5.0'

4.8'

59

95

85

100

50

95

58

-

50/2"

9

10

100/5"

Rock fragment at

tip of spoon

Rollerbit advanced

to 103.0' EI. -100.2'

EI. -115.2'

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

6 OF 7

DURING DRILLING: 0.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 10/24/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698047.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 118'

END 11/1/11

START 10/24/11

BORING NO. BW-317

ELEVATION: 2.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 35.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 15:30 DATE: 10/31/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600637.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

100.2

101.0

102.4

103.0

108.0

113.0

118.0
gallons of potable water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

7 OF 7

DURING DRILLING: 0.5' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 10/24/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698047.8±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 118'

END 11/1/11

START 10/24/11

BORING NO. BW-317

ELEVATION: 2.8±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 35.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 10:00

TIME: 15:30 DATE: 10/31/11

REMARKS

TIME: 15:30

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600637.3±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:
GP

PT

GP

SM

SM

SP-SM

ML

ML

4.0'

8.0'

20.0'

Dark gray roots and plant fragments, (FILL).

Dark gray medium to fine GRAVEL, little coarse to fine

Sand, trace Silt, frequent concrete and cinder

fragments, (FILL).

Brown fibrous PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Dark gray and black medium to fine GRAVEL,

(ALLUVIUM).

Greenish gray fine SAND, and Silt, occasional wood

fragments, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray fine SAND, little Silt, trace wood fragments,

(ALLUVIUM).

...trace Silt.

Light brown Clayey SILT, some fine Sand,

(ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

0.3'

0.3'

0.6'

0.0'

0.2'

0.7'

1.2'

1.5'

2.0'

0.8'

15

15

30

0

10

35

60

75

100

40

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

WH

WH

WH

WH

1

1

1

1

3

3

1

1

1

2

3

2

3

6

7

8

10

10

8

11

2

4

8

7

4

9

11

13

3

5

7

9

3

3

4

6

Peat in cuttings to

8.0'

Casing bounced at

8' bgs

Casing spinning

with rods

S-6: mc=20.4%

35%<#200

EI. -1.7'

EI. -5.7'

EI. -17.7'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 11/1/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698092.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 38.5'

END 11/1/11

START 11/1/11

BORING NO. BW-319

ELEVATION: 2.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 7:00

TIME: 16:00 DATE: 11/1/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600725.2±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

38.5'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray SILT & CLAY varved with brown Clay & Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

...little fine Sand.

Gray SILT & CLAY varved with brown Clay & Silt, little

fine Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray SILT & CLAY varved with brown Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/8"± silt & clay, 1/16"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

No recovery.

Gray-brown SILT & CLAY varved with gray Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/8"± silt & clay, 1/16"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Bottom of borehole at 38.5 feet.

Notes:

1. Borehole tremie grouted using 1/2x94-lb bag of

S-11

S-12

U-1

S-13

S-14

S-15

S-16

S-17

S-18

1.2'

1.8'

2.0'

1.7'

2.0'

0.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.5'

60

90

100

85

100

0

100

100

100

-

-

PP

0.75

TV

0.25

PP

1.50

PP

1.75

-

PP

0.50

PP

<0.25

PP

<0.25

1

2

2

2

3

3

4

5

P

U

S

H

2

2

3

4

4

4

7

8

2

3

5

4

3

2

3

3

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

WH

S-11: mc=29.2%

LL=30, PI=9

99%<#200

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1: mc=29.5%

LL=29, PI=6

Advanced 4" casing

to 29.0'

2 attempts

Spoon bouncing at

38.5' under hammer

weight

EI. -36.2'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 11/1/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698092.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 38.5'

END 11/1/11

START 11/1/11

BORING NO. BW-319

ELEVATION: 2.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 7:00

TIME: 16:00 DATE: 11/1/11

REMARKS

TIME: 16:00

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600725.2±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

24.0

25.0

27.0

29.0

31.0

33.0

35.0

37.0

38.5
portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, potable

water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY R. Jeremic/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 3

DURING DRILLING: 0.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 0.0'

DATE: 11/1/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker Soil XLS Track Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 698092.6±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 38.5'

END 11/1/11

START 11/1/11

BORING NO. BW-319

ELEVATION: 2.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 29.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 7:00

TIME: 16:00 DATE: 11/1/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 600725.2±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:
SP-SM

GM

PT

SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

9.0'

12.0'

Gray-brown coarse to fine SAND, some coarse to fine

Gravel, little(-) Silt, (FILL).

Brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, little coarse to fine

Sand, little Clayey Silt, (FILL).

No recovery, black organic Silt & Clay at tip of spoon.

Black PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Gray coarse(-) to fine SAND, little(+) Clayey Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

0.3'

0.0'

1.0'

1.3'

1.5'

1.5'

1.2'

15

0

50

65

75

75

60

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

10

8

8

9

7

4

1

3

1

1

1

2

3

2

2

2

15

21

17

16

14

17

20

13

12

10

7

8

Hand augered to

6.0'

S-3: mc=339.7%

LL=482, PI=166

11.2%<#200

86.4% organic

content

S-6: mc=15.3%

88.3%<#200

EI. -4.9'

EI. -7.9'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 3.0'

DATE: 11/21/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker LS Track with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696653.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 70.1'

END 11/22/11

START 11/21/11

BORING NO. BW-368

ELEVATION: 4.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 15:00 DATE: 11/22/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597887.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
SP-SM

ML

CL

CL

CL

25.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray SILT & CLAY varved with Clayey Silt, little fine

Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray CLAY & SILT varved with brown Silt & Clay,

alternating 1/2"± clay & silt, 1/4"± silt & clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray CLAY & SILT varved with brown Silt & Clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-8

S-9

S-10

S-11

U-1

0.6'

1.7'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

30

85

100

100

100

-

-

PP

2.50

PP

2.00

PP

2.00

TV

1.00

2

4

6

6

14

11

12

10

10

8

8

5

3

4

5

7

P

U

S

H

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-1: mc=30.4%

LL=37, PI=14

99.5%<#200

EI. -20.9'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 3.0'

DATE: 11/21/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker LS Track with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696653.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 70.1'

END 11/22/11

START 11/21/11

BORING NO. BW-368

ELEVATION: 4.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 15:00 DATE: 11/22/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597887.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

35.0

37.0

38.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

CL

GM

53.0'

60.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Brown Silty CLAY varved with gray Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/2"± silty clay, 1/4"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY varved with gray Clay & Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown SILT & CLAY varved with gray Clay & Silt,

alternating 1/2"± silt & clay, 1/4"± clay & silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Red-brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, little coarse to fine

Sand, little Silty Clay, (GLACIAL TILL).

.....(continued on next page).

S-12

S-13

U-2

S-14

S-15

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.7'

1.3'

100

100

100

85

65

PP

1.50

PP

1.00

PP

1.00

TV

0.50

PP

2.00

-

1

2

3

5

1

3

3

2

P

U

S

H

8

9

14

10

13

14

11

10

Undisturbed sample

collected using a

Shelby tube

U-2: mc=28.0%

LL=46, PI=23

99.9%<#200

Strong rig

chattering from 53'

S-15: mc=8.8%

7.0%<#200

Strong rig

chattering to 60'

EI. -48.9'

EI. -55.9'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 3.0'

DATE: 11/21/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker LS Track with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696653.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 70.1'

END 11/22/11

START 11/21/11

BORING NO. BW-368

ELEVATION: 4.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 15:00 DATE: 11/22/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597887.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

45.0

47.0

48.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
WR 60.1'

70.1'

Rock fragments at tip of spoon.

Top of Rock at 60.1 feet.

Red-brown SILTSTONE, slightly weathered, medium

strong, closely to moderately spaced fractures,

(COMPETENT PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 70.1 feet.

Notes:

1. Borehole tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags

portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, and 50

gallons of potable water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

S-16

C-1

C-2

0.1'

4.8'

5.0'

100

97

77

100

80

100/1" - .....(continued from

previous page)

EI. -56.0'

EI. -66.0'

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 4

DURING DRILLING: 3.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 3.0'

DATE: 11/21/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker LS Track with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696653.5±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 70.1'

END 11/22/11

START 11/21/11

BORING NO. BW-368

ELEVATION: 4.1±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 9:00

TIME: 15:00 DATE: 11/22/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597887.1±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

60.1

65.1

70.1
SM

SM

ML-OL

OH-PT

SM

SP

9.8'

12.0'

Brown coarse to fine SAND, some coarse to fine

Gravel, little Silt, with frequent brick and concrete

fragments, (FILL).

Black and brown coarse to fine SAND, some(-) coarse

to fine Gravel, little Silt, with frequent brick and

concrete fragments, (FILL).

...little coarse to fine Gravel, little Silt, frequent brick

and concrete fragments.

Black Organic CLAY & SILT, occasional roots and

fibers, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Brown PEAT, (ORGANIC DEPOSIT).

Brown coarse to fine SAND, little Organic Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Brown-gray coarse to fine SAND, and medium to fine

Gravel, trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

G-1

S-1

S-2

U-1

S-3

S-4

0.4'

0.6'

1.5'

1.7'

1.3'

20

30

75

85

65

-

-

-

-

-

-

6

6

5

3

12

11

7

33

P

U

S

H

3

14

15

28

4

9

12

14

Hand augered to

6.0'

Spoon dropped in

bottom 2" of S-2

U-1: mc=522.6%

LL=496, PI=233

94.8%<#200

86.4% organic

content

EI. -4.2'

EI. -6.4'

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.0'

DATE: 12/6/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-750 Rubber Tire Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696507.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Carire/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 78.7'

END 12/9/11

START 12/6/11

BORING NO. BW-369D

ELEVATION: 5.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 8:30

TIME: 9:30 DATE: 12/9/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597582.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

20.0
SP

SP

CL

CL

CL

29.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray coarse to fine SAND, little medium to fine Gravel,

trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Brown coarse to fine SAND, some medium to fine

Gravel, trace Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray varved CLAY & SILT and Silty CLAY, alternating

1/8"± to 1/16"± clay & silt, 1/8"± to 1/16"± silty clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray CLAY & SILT varved with Silty Clay,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray CLAY & SILT varved with brown Silty Clay,

alternating 3/8"± to 1/8"± clay & silt, 1/8"± to 1/16"±

silty clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

.....(continued on next page).

S-5

S-6

S-7

U-2

S-8

0.6'

0.5'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

30

25

100

100

100

-

-

PP

1.50

PP

1.50

TV

0.75

PP

1.00

6

10

9

8

3

4

5

5

4

5

6

7

P

U

S

H

3

2

1

2

U-2: mc=32.0%

LL=35, PI=14

100%<#200

EI. -23.4'

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.0'

DATE: 12/6/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-750 Rubber Tire Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696507.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Carire/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 78.7'

END 12/9/11

START 12/6/11

BORING NO. BW-369D

ELEVATION: 5.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 8:30

TIME: 9:30 DATE: 12/9/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597582.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

25.0

27.0

30.0

32.0

33.0

35.0

37.0

40.0
CL

CL

CL

GM

50.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray CLAY & SILT varved with brown Silty Clay,

alternating 5/8"± to 1/8"± clay & silt, 3/8"± to 1/8"± silty

clay, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Brown Silty CLAY varved with gray Clay & Silt,

(GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT).

Gray & brown varved CLAY & SILT, alternating 3/4"±

to 1/8"± gray clay & silt, 3/8"± to 1/8"± brown clay &

silt, with fine Sand, (GLACIOLACUSTRINE

DEPOSIT).

Reddish brown CLAY & SILT, some(-) coarse to fine

Gravel, little(-) coarse to fine Sand, (GLACIAL TILL).

Reddish brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, some coarse

to fine Sand, little Clayey Silt, (GLACIAL TILL).

.....(continued on next page).

S-9

U-3

S-10

S-11

S-12

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.5'

100

100

100

100

75

PP

0.50

PP

1.00

TV

0.75

PP

1.00

-

-

3

2

2

3

P

U

S

H

1

2

3

4

6

12

23

45

14

17

23

19

U-3: mc=39.7%

LL=47, PI=25

99.9%<#200

Rig chattering from

53.0'

EI. -44.4'

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

3 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.0'

DATE: 12/6/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-750 Rubber Tire Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696507.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Carire/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 78.7'

END 12/9/11

START 12/6/11

BORING NO. BW-369D

ELEVATION: 5.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 8:30

TIME: 9:30 DATE: 12/9/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597582.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

42.0

43.0

45.0

47.0

50.0

52.0

55.0

57.0

60.0
GM

69.0'

73.6'

78.7'

.....(continued from previous page). Reddish brown coarse to fine GRAVEL, little coarse to

fine Sand, little(+) Clay & Silt, (GLACIAL TILL).

No recovery.

Top of Rock at 69.0 feet.

Reddish brown SILTSTONE interbedded

SANDSTONE from 72.3' to 72.9', slightly weathered,

medium strong, very closely to moderately spaced

fractures, (WEATHERED PASSAIC FORMATION).

Reddish brown SILTSTONE, slightly weathered,

medium strong, closely to moderately spaced

fractures, (COMPETENT PASSAIC FORMATION).

Bottom of borehole at 78.7 feet.

Notes:

1. Borehole tremie grouted using 2x94-lb bags

S-13

S-14

C-1

C-2

1.7'

0.0'

4.6'

5.1'

85

0

100

36

100

84

-

-

38

28

37

49

100/2"

Intermittent loss of

drilling fluid

EI. -63.4'

EI. -68.0'

EI. -73.1'

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

4 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.0'

DATE: 12/6/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-750 Rubber Tire Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696507.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Carire/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 78.7'

END 12/9/11

START 12/6/11

BORING NO. BW-369D

ELEVATION: 5.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 8:30

TIME: 9:30 DATE: 12/9/11

REMARKS

TIME: 9:30

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597582.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

62.0

65.0

65.2

69.0

73.6

78.7
portland cement, 1/2x50-lb bag of bentonite, and 30

gallons of potable water.

2. Undisturbed sample moisture contents noted in

"Remarks" reflect an average of all moisture contents

determined for the sample.

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

5 OF 5

DURING DRILLING: 4.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 2.0'

DATE: 12/6/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED CME-750 Rubber Tire Rig with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696507.1±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY M. Carire/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, NX/NQ Coring BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 78.7'

END 12/9/11

START 12/6/11

BORING NO. BW-369D

ELEVATION: 5.6±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 30.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 8:30

TIME: 9:30 DATE: 12/9/11

REMARKS

TIME: 9:30

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597582.8±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:
SM

SM

SM

SM

SM

SM

GM

PT

SM

SM

SM

14.0'

14.7'

Brown coarse to fine SAND, some coarse to fine

Gravel, little Silt, frequent black pockets of stained soil

and brick fragments, (FILL).

...and coarse to fine Gravel.

...some medium to fine Gravel.

Dark gray and brown coarse to fine SAND, some

medium to fine Gravel, little Silt, frequent brick

fragments, (FILL).

Dark gray and black medium to fine Gravel, and

coarse to fine Sand, little Silt, (FILL).

Brown PEAT, semi-decomposed fibers, (ORGANIC

DEPOSIT).

Gray fine SAND, little(+) Clayey Silt, (ALLUVIUM).

Gray medium to fine SAND, little(+) Clayey Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown coarse to fine SAND, little Silt, little(-)

medium to fine Gravel, (ALLUVIUM).

.....(continued on next page).

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8A

S-8B

S-9

S-10

1.0'

1.2'

1.3'

1.3'

0.5'

0.8'

0.5'

1.0'

0.9'

1.1'

50

60

65

65

25

40

25

50

45

55

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

3

6

10

14

8

8

16

16

47

49

51

49

12

18

37

25

5

4

3

5

6

8

17

23

5

9

6

1

3

3

2

2

WH

WH

3

4

8

10

11

11

Fifth attempt to

advance this

borehole

S-3 - no stained soil

observed below 4'

EI. -4.8'

EI. -5.5'

moist

moist

moist

moist

moist

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

wet

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

1 OF 2

DURING DRILLING: 10.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 10.0'

DATE: 12/5/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker XLS Track with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696371.3±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 24'

END 12/5/11

START 12/5/11

BORING NO. BW-369S

ELEVATION: 9.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 11:00

TIME: 14:30 DATE: 12/5/11

REMARKS

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597275.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0
SM

SM

24.0'

.....(continued from previous page). Gray-brown medium to fine SAND, trace Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Gray-brown coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt,

(ALLUVIUM).

Bottom of borehole at 24 feet.

Notes:

1. Borehole tremie grouted using 1x94-lb bag portland

cement, 15-lbs of bentonite, and 30 gallons of potable

water.

2. Fifth attempt made to advance boring.

S-11

S-12

0.5'

0.4'

25

20

-

-

7

8

8

7

8

8

10

11 EI. -14.8'

INSPECTORS NAME/COMPANY J. Thampi/YU & Associates, Inc.

2 OF 2

DURING DRILLING: 10.0' SAMPLE NO./ TYPE/CORE RUN RECOVERY(%) RQD (%)

DESCRIPTION

.

END OF DRILLING: 10.0'

DATE: 12/5/11

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

EQUIPMENT USED Acker XLS Track with Automatic Hammer

. DEPTH ( FT)

CHECKED BY: D. Mazujian POCKET PENT/ TORVANE (TSF)

N. 696371.3±

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Cruz/JBD

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary BLOWS/0.5 FT ON SAMPLER

TOTAL DEPTH: 24'

END 12/5/11

START 12/5/11

BORING NO. BW-369S

ELEVATION: 9.3±

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Final Engineering DATUM: NGVD29 RECOVERY (FT)

CASING SIZE: 4.0" DEPTH: 20.0' USCS

DATE: 2/22/12

LOCATION Amtrak

TIME: 11:00

TIME: 14:30 DATE: 12/5/11

REMARKS

TIME: 14:30

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG SAMPLE MOISTURE

E. 597275.5±

COUNTY Hudson

SHEET

DATE:

22.0

24.0
75

100

80

75

75

75

60

10

Brown, coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt,

(Alluvial)

-

15

Brown, PEAT, (Meadow Mat)

5

Gray and brown, medium to fine SAND, and

Silt, (Alluvial)

Gray and brown, coarse to fine SAND, little

Silt, (Alluvial)

Black, SILT & CLAY, and coarse to fine Sand,

little medium to fine Gravel, (Fill)

1.5'

EI. -5.0'

10.0'

8.5'

6.0'

1.2'

0.1'

0.2'

1.5'

1.5'

1.5'

1.6'

2.0'

0.3'

pt

ml

ml

ml

sm

w

EI. -7.5'

EI. -9.0'

EI. -17.0'

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

sm

w

11

17

18

27

5

5

4

6

5

4

3

6

1

2

2

3

3

1

2

2

9

10

11

11

WH

1

WH

1

1

3

4

2

2

1

WH

1

sp

sm

sm

sm

WR

WR

2

5 S-1 - S-3: contains organic

matter, glass, brick frags,

and debris

-

N. 697310.41

EQUIPMENT USED Barrel Float - Barge Mounted Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer, 2 1/4 turns on cathead

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, Continuous SS Sampling, NX Conventional Rock Coring

DATE: 11/3/08

DATE: 11/12/08 END OF DRILLING:

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD Drilling Inc.

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

STATION

.

END 11/10/08

TIME:

18.0'

1 5

CASING: SIZE: 4"

CHECKED BY: M. McCullough

START 11/3/08

TIME: 10:00

E. 598937.41

TIME: DATE:

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

DURING DRILLING: -1.0'

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

USCS

POCKET PENT/

TORVANE (TSF)

DEPTH: 18.0'

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG

SHEET

O.G.

ELEV. 1.0

AASHTO

RQD (%)

COUNTY Hudson

RECOVERY(%)

LOCATION Amtrak Property

BORING NO. GF-1

DEPTH ( FT)

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

INSPECTOR J. Krupansky

DATE:

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5

S-4

S-3

S-2

S-1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

.

REMARKS

OF

S-10

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

H O2 CONTENT

DESCRIPTION

OFFSET FROM CENTERLINE

8.0

20.0

18.0

16.0

14.0

10.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

12.0
75

100

100

75

1.5'

50

50

50

75

75

Gray and brown, CLAYEY SILT, varved with

some fine Sand layers, (Glaciolacustrine)

Gray and brown, coarse to fine SAND, little

Silt, (Alluvial) .....(continued from previous

page)

PP

1.25

100

EI. -22.0'

PP

1.50

PP

2.50

PP

2.50

PP

1.25

-

-

23.0'

1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.5'

1.5'

1.0'

1.0'

1.0'

ml

ml

ml

ml

ml

sm

ml

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

23.0 - 66.0: contains closely

spaced thin sandy varves

5

7

8

10

7

6

7

7

6

7

8

9

9

11

12

13

11

12

12

14

15

18

21

29

14

21

27

35

15

22

23

16

ml

14

18

23

25

ml

ml

PP

1.00

14

24

17

24

.

EQUIPMENT USED Barrel Float - Barge Mounted Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer, 2 1/4 turns on cathead

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, Continuous SS Sampling, NX Conventional Rock Coring

DATE: 11/3/08

DATE: 11/12/08 END OF DRILLING:

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD Drilling Inc.

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project

CHECKED BY: M. McCullough

STATION

SHEET

END 11/10/08

START 11/3/08

N. 697310.41 E. 598937.41

NOT ENCOUNTERED

WATER:

TIME: DATE:

TIME: 10:00

PP

1.00

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

RECOVERY(%)

USCS

.

RQD (%)

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG

SAMPLE NO./

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

TYPE/CORE RUN

DEPTH ( FT)

BORING NO. GF-1

LOCATION Amtrak Property

DEPTH: 18.0'

COUNTY Hudson

INSPECTOR J. Krupansky

AASHTO

O.G.

ELEV. 1.0

CASING: SIZE: 4"

POCKET PENT/

TORVANE (TSF)

S-12

S-20

S-19

S-18

S-17

S-16

S-15

DURING DRILLING: -1.0'

S-13

S-11

PP

0.75

S-14

H O CONTENT 2

2 5

DATE:

DESCRIPTION

OFFSET FROM CENTERLINE

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

OF

REMARKS

.

38.0

36.0

34.0

32.0

30.0

28.0

26.0

24.0

22.0

40.0
100

PP

0.50

2.0'

100

2.0'

100

75

100

100

100

100

100

Brown, CLAYEY SILT, varved with some fine

Sand layers, (Glaciolacustrine)

Gray and brown, CLAYEY SILT, varved with

some fine Sand layers, (Glaciolacustrine)

.....(continued from previous page)

100

EI. -51.0'

PP

1.00

PP

0.75

PP

1.00

PP

0.50

PP

0.50

-

PP

0.50

52.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

ml

ml

ml

ml

ml

ml

cl

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

6

7

9

9

PP

0.50

3

2

1

4

4

5

4

4

4

4

6

7

3

5

5

8

6

9

9

14

7

9

13

16

cl

5

6

7

10

cl

cl

5

6

8

11

STATION

PP

0.75

EQUIPMENT USED Barrel Float - Barge Mounted Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer, 2 1/4 turns on cathead

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, Continuous SS Sampling, NX Conventional Rock Coring

DATE: 11/3/08

DATE: 11/12/08 END OF DRILLING:

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD Drilling Inc.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

SHEET

.

END 11/10/08

START 11/3/08

N. 697310.41 E. 598937.41

NOT ENCOUNTERED

WATER:

TIME: DATE:

TIME: 10:00

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project RQD (%)

.

POCKET PENT/

TORVANE (TSF)

CASING: SIZE: 4"

RECOVERY(%)

SAMPLE NO./

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

TYPE/CORE RUN

DEPTH ( FT)

BORING NO. GF-1

LOCATION Amtrak Property

DEPTH: 18.0'

COUNTY Hudson

INSPECTOR J. Krupansky

AASHTO

O.G.

ELEV. 1.0

USCS

S-22

S-29

S-28

S-27

S-26

S-25

DURING DRILLING: -1.0'

S-23

ST-1

S-21

S-24

H O CONTENT 2

3 5

DATE:

DESCRIPTION

OFFSET FROM CENTERLINE

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

OF

.

CHECKED BY: M. McCullough

REMARKS

60.0

58.0

56.0

54.0

52.0

50.0

48.0

46.0

44.0

42.0
1.5'

2.0'

2.0'

2.0'

0.0'

0.0'

100

50

72

0

0

10

75

100

100

66.0'

-

-

-

-

-

-

0.2'

73.0'

3.6'

PP

0.50

sm

sm

cl

cl

100 cl

w

w

w

w

w

EI. -72.0'

EI. -65.0'

MUDSTONE, reddish brown, hard, moderately

weathered, closely spaced joints, contains

inter-bedded sandstone

 Top of Rock @ 73.0 ft

Reddish brown, coarse to fine SAND, and Silt,

little coarse to fine Gravel, (Glacial Till)

Brown, CLAYEY SILT, varved with some fine

Sand layers, (Glaciolacustrine) .....(continued

from previous page)

100/0.1

24

60

70

89

9

10

8

12

6

8

8

7

1

WH

WH

WH

1

WH

WH

2

3

3

2

5

Roller Bit Refusal at 73.0 ft

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD Drilling Inc.

SHEET

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG

.

EQUIPMENT USED Barrel Float - Barge Mounted Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer, 2 1/4 turns on cathead

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, Continuous SS Sampling, NX Conventional Rock Coring

WATER: DATE: 11/3/08

DATE: 11/12/08

INSPECTOR J. Krupansky

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

STATION

.

END 11/10/08

START 11/3/08

N. 697310.41 E. 598937.41

END OF DRILLING:

POCKET PENT/

TORVANE (TSF)

O.G.

ELEV. 1.0

USCS

AASHTO

RQD (%)

RECOVERY(%)

SAMPLE NO./

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

TYPE/CORE RUN

DEPTH ( FT)

BORING NO. GF-1

LOCATION Amtrak Property

DEPTH: 18.0'

COUNTY Hudson

TIME:

S-30

NOT ENCOUNTERED

S-31

S-32

S-33

S-34

H O2 CONTENT

R-1

S-36

S-35

TIME: DATE:

DURING DRILLING: -1.0' TIME: 10:00

CHECKED BY: M. McCullough

CASING: SIZE: 4"

4 5

DESCRIPTION

OFFSET FROM CENTERLINE

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

OF

REMARKS

.

DATE:

72.0

62.0

64.0

66.0

70.0

72.1

73.0

78.0

68.0
DURING DRILLING: -1.0'

OFFSET FROM CENTERLINE

DESCRIPTION

DATE:

5 5

START 11/3/08

CHECKED BY: M. McCullough

OF

TIME: 10:00

TIME: DATE:

WATER:

NOT ENCOUNTERED

N. 697310.41

CASING: SIZE: 4"

5.0'

EI. -82.0'

MUDSTONE, reddish brown, hard, moderately

weathered, closely spaced joints, contains

inter-bedded sandstone .....(continued from

previous page)

Bottom of borehole at 83.0 feet.

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

83.0'

R-2

H O2 CONTENT

.

REMARKS

END 11/10/08

48

E. 598937.41

BORING NO. GF-1

DEPTH ( FT)

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

RECOVERY(%)

RQD (%)

POCKET PENT/

TORVANE (TSF)

DEPTH: 18.0'USCS

.

STATION

MUNICIPALITY Kearny

PROJECT NAME Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project

DRILLERS NAME/COMPANY C. Deigert/JBD Drilling Inc.

DATE: 11/12/08 END OF DRILLING:

DATE: 11/3/08

DRILLING METHODS Mud Rotary, Continuous SS Sampling, NX Conventional Rock Coring

LOCATION Amtrak Property

.

ENGINEERS FIELD BORING LOG

SHEET

O.G.

ELEV. 1.0

AASHTO

INSPECTOR J. Krupansky

COUNTY Hudson

EQUIPMENT USED Barrel Float - Barge Mounted Acker Skid Rig with Donut Hammer, 2 1/4 turns on cathead

83.0